Glossed Over

Magazines Acknowledge The Cost of Clothes: A Recession Fashion Rundown

So, the U.S. is teetering on the brink of a recession. While there is a smattering of financial advice scattered throughout the July issues, the magazines focus on something far more important than investments and job security: looking good! Priorities! The best investment to weather an economic crisis is, apparently, your wardrobe. I’m no financial expert, but based on what’s in the magazines this month, I will say this: If Forever 21 ever goes public, buy.

Nearly all the magazines offer looks at lower prices, but considering the source, lower-priced is not necessarily low-end. Here’s a breakdown of the style sticker shock:

Bazaar

One page of “Hottest, Newest, Latest” is devoted to “fashion at AFFORDABLE prices.” It was wise to emphasize the word “affordable,” because otherwise—well, see for yourself.

Total number of deals: 6

Their idea of dirt cheap: A $69 Banana Republic scarf

Most expensive bargain: A $395 Elie Tahari clutch

Cheapest item elsewhere in the magazine: $140 J. Crew flats

Priciest item elsewhere in the magazine: A $450,000 Neil Lane for De Beers bracelet

Item whose price makes me question the wisdom of capitalism: A $46,650 Balenciaga dress. No, it isn’t woven from gold. Why do you ask?

Cosmopolitan

“How to Shop Summer Sales” blends fashion with suggestions to befriend a saleswoman and keep your receipts for price adjustments. Original!

Total number of deals: 14

Their idea of dirt cheap: A $49 dress from Macy’s

Most expensive bargain: A $158 necklace, Marc by Marc Jacobs

Cheapest item elsewhere in the magazine: $48 DKNY jeans

Priciest item elsewhere in the magazine: A $575 3.1 Philip Lim dress

Item whose price makes me question the wisdom of capitalism: Cosmo neglects to list prices for the most expensive items, like the YSL cardigan worn by a model riding a jetski. Where else would you wear such a sweater?

Elle

An eight-page spread, “Le Cheap, C’est Chic!,” is annoyingly teased on the cover with the line “No She Didn’t!” Because, you know, spending less than $150 on an item of clothing is totally a novel lifestyle choice and not a necessity!

Total number of deals: Who can tell what Elle thinks is “cheap”? They’ve got Forever 21 mixed with Burberry.

Their idea of dirt cheap: A $6 bead necklace and, the fashion find of the century, a $7 Hanes t-shirt. Thanks for uncovering that hidden gem, Elle!

Most expensive bargain: Elle’s “inexpensive” clothes are paired with thousands of dollars of jewelry, as if that’s the only way to redeem them. The highest-priced piece in “Le Cheap” is a $3,990 diamond ring.

Cheapest item elsewhere in the magazine: $48 Levi’s denim shorts worn by Mary-Kate Olsen

Priciest item elsewhere in the magazine: A $5,600 Marchesa satin dress

Item whose price makes me question the wisdom of capitalism: Ludicrous $300 square sunglasses by Luella by Linda Farrow. People aren’t actually going to buy those, right? Right?

Glamour

Bargains are splashed across one page, “Summery work stuff—all less than $40,” and a high-low feature, “Your Summer Extras.”

Total number of deals: 12 for sure; the high-low feature doesn’t designate what is what. A $40 scarf could go either way.

Their idea of dirt cheap: A $10 Shop Suey ring

Most expensive bargain: A $70 Roberta Freymann tote (assuming this is what counts for low-end in Glamour’s universe. Since another page in the same story features a $795 straw hat, I think it must.)

Cheapest item elsewhere in the magazine: A $25 Chinese Laundry belt

Priciest item elsewhere in the magazine: The $12,000 Louis Vuitton Speedy mentioned here

Item whose price makes me question the wisdom of capitalism: Gotta be that hat.

InStyle

An anemic single page is devoted to “Deals & Steals.”

Total number of deals: 7

Their idea of dirt cheap: $14 aviator sunglasses by Shop Suey

Most expensive bargain: A $139 MNG by Mango dress

Cheapest item elsewhere in the magazine: An $18 American Apparel t-shirt

Priciest item elsewhere in the magazine: An $88,000 Van Cleef and Arpels ring

Item whose price makes me question the wisdom of capitalism: An $18,000 Donna Karan crocodile bag. It’s just a purse.

Lucky

An entire feature, “The Season’s Best Looks Under $100,” is given over to low-price style.

Total number of deals: 67

Their idea of dirt cheap: An $18 Mossimo for Target top

Most expensive bargain: Tie: at $99, a “tiered maxiskirt” by WDNY International and a Tommy Hilfiger cotton dress

Cheapest item elsewhere in the magazine: A $7 Metro 7 tank top

Priciest item elsewhere in the magazine: A $1,465 bracelet by Steven Dweck

Item whose price makes me question the wisdom of capitalism: Chanel charges $1,225 for a belt. A belt! I regret not launching a career in luxury fashion.

Marie Claire

They’ve spread the discounts throughout: there’s one page of “101 Ideas,” one page of “Splurge vs. Steal,” and a feature, “Black & White,” that’s high-low.

Total number of deals: 40

Their idea of dirt cheap: $7 Hue socks (Thanks, Marie Claire, I was really overspending on socks.)

Most expensive bargain: $300 Marciano shoes (worn with the $7 Hue socks, natch)

Cheapest item elsewhere in the magazine: $5.80 Forever 21 sunglasses

Priciest item elsewhere in the magazine: An $18,800 Cartier ring

Item whose price makes me question the wisdom of capitalism: A Chanel top and skirt set that retails for the low, low price of $10,745.

Self

Looks like all the clothes shown in the  fashion features under $100, which is excellent.

Total number of deals: 100, according to the cover

Their idea of dirt cheap: It’s a tie at $8 for a Forever 21 necklace and Old Navy earrings

Most expensive bargain: Another tie, this one at $99, for a Nahui Ollin tote, an RJ Graziano necklace, and a $99 Tommy Hilfiger clutch. Those are special prices for Self readers, however, so this hews dangerously close to cheating.

Cheapest item elsewhere in the magazine: See above for $8 jewelry.

Priciest item elsewhere in the magazine: That tank top Anne Hathaway is wearing on the cover? Yeah. It’s $845, and she’s wearing it with necklaces whose combined total is $5,300.

Item whose price makes me question the wisdom of capitalism: $49 jelly shoes, but probably only because I’m old enough to remember buying jellies the first time around.

Vogue

In “The Economists,” Vogue editors offer “inspired finds under $500 (plus one key investment piece).” Oh, thank god, because I needed help to find clothes that cost so little.

Total number of deals: 31, not counting the home décor and investment pieces

Their idea of dirt cheap: A $127 Sykes London belt

Most expensive bargain: Seven items retail for $495, including a John Varvatos coat, a Moschino Cheap and Chic skirt, and a  3.1 Philip Lim dress. (You didn’t think they’d go four whole pages without mentioning Lim, did you?)

Cheapest item elsewhere in the magazine: A $150 YSL dickey

Priciest item elsewhere in the magazine: A $16,600 Cartier watch

Item whose price makes me question the wisdom of capitalism: Hands down, the dickeys were the most egregiously priced items I saw in any of the magazines. Vogue featured two: a $150 YSL version and a $395 Prada one. That’s an awful lot of scratch for something that isn’t even a real shirt.

So, the U.S. is teetering on the brink of a recession. While there is a smattering of financial advice scattered throughout the July issues, the magazines focus on something far more important than investments and job security: looking good! Priorities! The best investment to weather an economic crisis is, apparently, your wardrobe. I’m no financial expert, but based on what’s in the magazines this month, I will say this: If Forever 21 ever goes public, buy.

Nearly all the magazines offer looks at lower prices, but considering the source, lower-priced is not necessarily low-end. Here’s a breakdown of the style sticker shock:

Bazaar

One page of “Hottest, Newest, Latest” is devoted to “fashion at AFFORDABLE prices.” It was wise to emphasize the word “affordable,” because otherwise—well, see for yourself.

Total number of deals: 6

Their idea of dirt cheap: A $69 Banana Republic scarf

Most expensive bargain: A $395 Elie Tahari clutch

Cheapest item elsewhere in the magazine: $140 J. Crew flats

Priciest item elsewhere in the magazine: A $450,000 Neil Lane for De Beers bracelet

Item whose price makes me question the wisdom of capitalism: A $46,650 Balenciaga dress. No, it isn’t woven from gold. Why do you ask?

Cosmopolitan

“How to Shop Summer Sales” blends fashion with suggestions to befriend a saleswoman and keep your receipts for price adjustments. Original!

Total number of deals: 14

Their idea of dirt cheap: A $49 dress from Macy’s

Most expensive bargain: A $158 necklace, Marc by Marc Jacobs

Cheapest item elsewhere in the magazine: $48 DKNY jeans

Priciest item elsewhere in the magazine: A $575 3.1 Philip Lim dress

Item whose price makes me question the wisdom of capitalism: Cosmo neglects to list prices for the most expensive items, like the YSL cardigan worn by a model riding a jetski. Where else would you wear such a sweater?

Elle

An eight-page spread, “Le Cheap, C’est Chic!,” is annoyingly teased on the cover with the line “No She Didn’t!” Because, you know, spending less than $150 on an item of clothing is totally a novel lifestyle choice and not a necessity!

Total number of deals: Who can tell what Elle thinks is “cheap”? They’ve got Forever 21 mixed with Burberry.

Their idea of dirt cheap: A $6 bead necklace and, the fashion find of the century, a $7 Hanes t-shirt. Thanks for uncovering that hidden gem, Elle!

Most expensive bargain: Elle’s “inexpensive” clothes are paired with thousands of dollars of jewelry, as if that’s the only way to redeem them. The highest-priced piece in “Le Cheap” is a $3,990 diamond ring.

Cheapest item elsewhere in the magazine: $48 Levi’s denim shorts worn by Mary-Kate Olsen

Priciest item elsewhere in the magazine: A $5,600 Marchesa satin dress

Item whose price makes me question the wisdom of capitalism: Ludicrous $300 square sunglasses by Luella by Linda Farrow. People aren’t actually going to buy those, right? Right?

Glamour

Bargains are splashed across one page, “Summery work stuff—all less than $40,” and a high-low feature, “Your Summer Extras.”

Total number of deals: 12 for sure; the high-low feature doesn’t designate what is what. A $40 scarf could go either way.

Their idea of dirt cheap: A $10 Shop Suey ring

Most expensive bargain: A $70 Roberta Freymann tote (assuming this is what counts for low-end in Glamour’s universe. Since another page in the same story features a $795 straw hat, I think it must.)

Cheapest item elsewhere in the magazine: A $25 Chinese Laundry belt

Priciest item elsewhere in the magazine: The $12,000 Louis Vuitton Speedy mentioned here

Item whose price makes me question the wisdom of capitalism: Gotta be that hat.

InStyle

An anemic single page is devoted to “Deals & Steals.”

Total number of deals: 7

Their idea of dirt cheap: $14 aviator sunglasses by Shop Suey

Most expensive bargain: A $139 MNG by Mango dress

Cheapest item elsewhere in the magazine: An $18 American Apparel t-shirt

Priciest item elsewhere in the magazine: An $88,000 Van Cleef and Arpels ring

Item whose price makes me question the wisdom of capitalism: An $18,000 Donna Karan crocodile bag. It’s just a purse.

Lucky

An entire feature, “The Season’s Best Looks Under $100,” is given over to low-price style.

Total number of deals: 67

Their idea of dirt cheap: An $18 Mossimo for Target top

Most expensive bargain: Tie: at $99, a “tiered maxiskirt” by WDNY International and a Tommy Hilfiger cotton dress

Cheapest item elsewhere in the magazine: A $7 Metro 7 tank top

Priciest item elsewhere in the magazine: A $1,465 bracelet by Steven Dweck

Item whose price makes me question the wisdom of capitalism: Chanel charges $1,225 for a belt. A belt! I regret not launching a career in luxury fashion.

Marie Claire

They’ve spread the discounts throughout: there’s one page of “101 Ideas,” one page of “Splurge vs. Steal,” and a feature, “Black & White,” that’s high-low.

Total number of deals: 40

Their idea of dirt cheap: $7 Hue socks (Thanks, Marie Claire, I was really overspending on socks.)

Most expensive bargain: $300 Marciano shoes (worn with the $7 Hue socks, natch)

Cheapest item elsewhere in the magazine: $5.80 Forever 21 sunglasses

Priciest item elsewhere in the magazine: An $18,800 Cartier ring

Item whose price makes me question the wisdom of capitalism: A Chanel top and skirt set that retails for the low, low price of $10,745.

Self

Looks like all the clothes shown in the  fashion features under $100, which is excellent.

Total number of deals: 100, according to the cover

Their idea of dirt cheap: It’s a tie at $8 for a Forever 21 necklace and Old Navy earrings

Most expensive bargain: Another tie, this one at $99, for a Nahui Ollin tote, an RJ Graziano necklace, and a $99 Tommy Hilfiger clutch. Those are special prices for Self readers, however, so this hews dangerously close to cheating.

Cheapest item elsewhere in the magazine: See above for $8 jewelry.

Priciest item elsewhere in the magazine: That tank top Anne Hathaway is wearing on the cover? Yeah. It’s $845, and she’s wearing it with necklaces whose combined total is $5,300.

Item whose price makes me question the wisdom of capitalism: $49 jelly shoes, but probably only because I’m old enough to remember buying jellies the first time around.

Vogue

In “The Economists,” Vogue editors offer “inspired finds under $500 (plus one key investment piece).” Oh, thank god, because I needed help to find clothes that cost so little.

Total number of deals: 31, not counting the home décor and investment pieces

Their idea of dirt cheap: A $127 Sykes London belt

Most expensive bargain: Seven items retail for $495, including a John Varvatos coat, a Moschino Cheap and Chic skirt, and a  3.1 Philip Lim dress. (You didn’t think they’d go four whole pages without mentioning Lim, did you?)

Cheapest item elsewhere in the magazine: A $150 YSL dickey

Priciest item elsewhere in the magazine: A $16,600 Cartier watch

Item whose price makes me question the wisdom of capitalism: Hands down, the dickeys were the most egregiously priced items I saw in any of the magazines. Vogue featured two: a $150 YSL version and a $395 Prada one. That’s an awful lot of scratch for something that isn’t even a real shirt.

Glamour Takes On Gossip Girl's Prohibitive Purse Prices

The July edition of Glamour’s “Dos, Don’ts, News & Views” compares the accessories of TV characters. Deeming a Jimmy Choo bag acceptable for a thirty-something denizen of Lipstick Jungle, the mag goes on to declare a Constance Billard freshman’s $2,495 Valentino tote unrealistically expensive for someone so young.

Oddly, Glamour failed to indicate which age group is permitted to carry the $12,000 Louis Vuitton Speedy bag pictured in “Sunny Day Chic” on page 144 (below). $12K for a bag to take to the beach, and they think Gossip Girl is unbelievable?

Bazaar Justifies Luxury Price Tags, Own Existence

For a long time, we’ve been peeved by magazines’ skewed ideas of what constitutes affordable. (Never mind the debate over whether fashion prices are deliberately exclusionary.) So pervasive is the notion that $150 is a reasonable expense for a belt that we occasionally have to wonder why our wardrobe contains so few expensive pieces. Will we ever own a pair of red-soled Louboutins? Is there some expense we could cut from our budget to be better able to afford a Balenciaga bag? Are we flat-out deluded thinking that our ensembles look like they don’t come from H&M? Not that we want those things, exactly, but we want to be able to afford them.

And then we had a sobering experience. We were at MAGIC, talking to a sales rep. As she showed us a handful of modal t-shirts, we asked the wholesale price. “$37,” she replied.

Our response? “Oh, so that’s really accessible.” The sales rep nodded and moved on to pick up a hooded sweatshirt, and we started to hate ourselves. At a wholesale price of $37, that t-shirt likely retails for at least $70. Which, even if money were no object, is an awful lot of cash to spend on a mere tee, and $70 is certainly not a mass-market price for a little cotton shirt. But in the moment we deemed that particular price point “accessible,” we wholeheartedly believed it. We were sleep-deprived, we’d already spent days walking the never-ending aisles of the show seeing pieces whose prices were far more unjustified, and, well, the t-shirts were baby-blanket soft. (We just feel fortunate that we snapped back to reality before we broke out the Visa card at the Fashion Show Mall later in the week.)

All of which is a really long way of saying that, having been immersed in a fantasy land of desirable consumer goods, we sort of understand how writers for Bazaar choke up the nerve to refer to a $300 cardigan as a “steal.” So our interest was piqued by “Why Does It Cost So Much?” in the March issue. Why, indeed?

Unfortunately, the article devotes just one brief paragraph to the actual reasons why apparel and accessories bear exorbitant price tags. Discard any notions of getting an educational glimpse inside the industry! Rather, the focus is on “how to cope and still look cool.” Here’s what writer Nandini D’Souza had to say:

...I held up my beloved pair of silver Dries Van Noten leather sandals...“How much do you think these cost?” I asked my husband, playing devil’s advocate. “Flip-flops are cheap,” he analyzed in a finance-thinking way. “But since they’re designer, $40, maybe $50.”

Until then, I had never doubted the $300-plus I had shelled out a few years ago for them…I started questioning my sanity: More than $300 for flip-flops?...I had thought I was one of the more frugal fashion editors around. But I wondered, when did everything get so expensive, and when did I stop noticing?

This apparently sincere question is followed by a litany of agreement from people who can actually afford those $300 flip-flops. Which, you know, is annoying. Can you really complain that $500 is too much to pay for shoes when, in fact, you have the ability to buy $500 shoes? (Tangential whine: when did “social” become acceptable parlance for “socialite”?)

“Social” Nina Griscom says,

“The prices today are so astronomical.”

And designer Jenni Kayne weighs in:

“You can’t get a pair for less than $500; $300 used to be the normal expensive shoe.”

So who’s to blame for these ultra-pricey pieces? Designers! Phillip Lim explains himself.

“A dress can cost you $20,000. That’s a whole lot of money,” he says. “You can renovate your kitchen for that, or for some people that’s their salary or their child’s school tuition. You start to feel guilty.”

Start?

For one, lines like Lim’s 3.1 Phillip Lim and Kayne’s label are filling the yawning gap between high and low. Socialite turned designer Tory Burch says, “The whole reason I started my company is because fashion is expensive.”

Tory Burch also charges $195 for a striped cotton tee, so forgive us if we aren’t exactly in agreement with her assessment of “expensive.”

To be fair, the article does give some reasonably good (if not novel) advice about not buying things just because they’re on sale, and recommends that women develop a uniform that suits their body type and lifestyle so they don’t feel the need to give in to every passing trend. However, the article gets progressively more grating, predictably returning to the justification of the positively vulgar price tags of luxury goods. What else can be expected from people whose livelihoods are dependent on the public buying costly stuff they don’t need? A chorus of fashion people rationalize their expenditures thusly:

On a $1,300 pair of Chanel boots:

“But they’re worth it, and they make everything look chic.”

On an Oscar de la Renta dress:

“…I’ll have it for the rest of my life. You can wear it again, and it never looks like last season’s dress.”

On $800 Azzedine Alaia shoes:

“Outrageous. But I wear them a lot.”

About the $7,000-and-up Kelly and Birkin bags from Hermès:

“It’s more about what’s timeless than what’s trendy.”

And our favorite, on a handbag by Yves Saint Laurent:

“I was like, ‘Oh my God, it’s only $1,595. It’s a deal!’” she recalls. “How sad is that?”

Very, very sad. Even worse is the article’s next implication. Can’t even manage to splash out on one of these “deal”s? You’re probably fat, too!

But let’s face it, not everyone can pull off those curved contours the way Jennifer Connelly did just weeks after Nicholas Ghesquiere introduced them. That doesn’t mean that that look can’t translate for a less-than-lithe nonceleb gal. “If you can’t afford the dress, get the shirt or scarf,” says [actress/designer Katie] Nehra. [emphasis ours]

Wait, we’re confused. What exactly is our problem again? Is it that we can’t afford or can’t fit into designer garb? Never mind! Here’s another plug for Phillip Lim!

…For spring, he has several alternatives to his own runway looks, including versions of a mint Grecian dress and a citron frock with a chain neckline.

At least he’s smart enough to knock off his own designs before Forever 21 does! Though we aren’t exactly sure how this reconciles with the guilt he mentioned earlier, especially when he suggests a way to acclimate to items whose prices contain a comma.

Lim’s advice for things that seem too expensive at first? “Sit on it for a few days, maybe a week.” [emphasis ours]

However, the most incredulity-inducing quote in the whole article has nothing to do with cash money:

Echoes Burch of seasonal hits, “They’re so identifiable, and I’d rather not wear something that screams what it is.”

This from a woman who puts her logo all over her line.

Ultimately, the article concludes that we should approach our wardrobes and our retirement plans in a similar manner.

The best way to stretch your dollar while still looking like a million of them is to think long-term investment...

Designer clothes as a long-term investment? Rather ludicrous coming from a magazine that tells us we need new clothes every single month.

Bazaar’s concept of “best” •  Oh, to live in such a world!  The “best buy of the day” on Bazaar’s site is a Marni necklace that retails for $1,296.  The upside?  Yesterday’s $295 cardigan from Tory Burch seems almost reasonable in comparison.

Scoping Out September Issues (Still): W

We know, we know.   This issue came out weeks ago, and we’re just now getting to it?   In our defense, it only showed up in the mail on Thursday.  This issue took ages to arrive, but at least our J. Crew catalogs arrive three times a week.  Sheesh.

All right…we might as well open the magazine.   After all, the October issue is probably going to show up any minute!

The issue weighs: 4.2 pounds

Issue thickness:  just over an inch

Who’s on the cover: Gwyneth Paltrow, looking how we imagine Donatella Versace looked thirty years ago—too much brow, too much blonde, too much bronzer.  Did Gwyn even look in the mirror before she stepped in front of the camera?

Who bought the back cover: Giorgio Armani.  The model’s wearing a shirt of paillettes and strange sleeves reminiscent of chain mail that aren’t even attached to the top.  We’ll cave to leggings long before we drop cash on woven metal sleeves.

Number of ad pages between the cover and the table of contents: The table of contents starts on page 112 and continues on 205—like the rest of the September issues, this tome is absurdly ad-heavy.

Total number of pages: 640!  It’s W’s biggest issue ever! Why, according to the cover, it’s

A Fall Fashion Bonanza

A bonanza of advertising, that is!  See below. 

How many of those pages are ads: 477, about 75 percent (source: MIN Online)

Subscription cards: Three bound.   We can deal.

Cosmetic samples: Daisy by Marc Jacobs.  Eh.  The ubiquitous Fendi Palazzo, about which we still aren’t convinced.  Viktor & Rolf Flowerbomb, which, yeah, lives up to its name.   That’s not a compliment.

Is it portable? We’ll just say that it felt more than a tad weird using our canvas Target tote to schlep a magazine that features a $22,650 crocodile bag.

Number of articles concerning the obscenely wealthy:  Oh, virtually all of them.   Our favorite (of the ones we bothered to read, because why torture ourselves?) was “Just Like Mom,” wherein young, super-rich women borrow clothes from their young-looking, super-rich moms.   Oh, fun!  It’s, like, recycling!

For one bash, Samantha pulled out a black and gold minidress that Jamee had donned for a New Year’s fete in Lyford Cay some thirty years ago.

Yep, totally quotidian.  Ready for the quote?

“Everyone was asking me, ‘Is that Prada?  Miu Miu?’  And it’s like, a $275 dress from Alexander’s, but it was just so incredibly chic.”

See, it’s nothing!   It’s just a dress that was crazy expensive when it was new a whole generation ago!  And that is why we eventually stopped reading the articles in this issue.

Not as annoying as we expected:  Gwyneth Paltrow’s interview.  That’s because it is actually, totally, definitively impossible to be more annoyed by her personality than we were by the photo of her feeding a rat with a sippy cup.  What the hell?

Exactly as annoying as expected: “Wild Roses,” shot by Mert Alas and Marcus Piggott.  Because, you know, we don’t expect much from photo editorials that involve live poultry.

More annoying than we expected:  It’s a tie between the aforementioned crocodile bag and the $3,300 crocodile gloves.  For the woman who wants to spend exactly the same amount of her gloves as she did on her most recent lunchtime mini-lift.

Best pseudonym ever: Jinx Titanic, who suggested a Posh-Becks-Brad-Angelina foursome in a letter to the editor (page 304). Jinx may well be the most awesome person alive.  Update: Kate at Fishbowl LA writes that Jinx Titanic is a punk legend.  Which, yes, makes the letter even better.

InStyle: Comfort Doesn't Come Cheap

We’ve previously discussed  the complete lack of perspective apparent in the prices of items recommended by our favorite magazines, but InStyle’s “Luxe Liaison,” April, sets a new standard for price-unconsciousness.

Here’s what jeweler Neil Lane has to say about his new collections, which feature admittedly lovely multi-colored diamonds:

“Just toss it on,” says Lane, who works with countless red-carpet deities.  [Ed. note: Deities?  Kind of a stretch, no?]  “I wouldn’t be successful if I made complicated jewelry.  It’s about being comfortable.”

Because, you know, $95,000 earrings and $70,000 bracelets are the embodiment of comfort. Go ahead, toss on that $13,000 ring!  Never mind that you could buy a small piece of property or a few luxury cars with that kind of money.  Neil Lane’s designs are all about ease...oh, and cash.

Marie Claire Has 20/20 Vision, Is Still Short-Sighted

Even though we wear glasses, we weren’t exactly thrilled to pieces with the beauty story “Specs Appeal” from Marie Claire’s March issue.  Why, other than the pun in the title we’ve seen a thousand times over?

This:

Coordinate your eye makeup with the season’s hottest new accessory, and baby, u got the look!

And u got clear vision, too! Glasses are, like, way more practical than those Lucite-heel Marc Jacobs shoes on page 66!

Note:  They really did spell “you” that way in what we can only assume was a vague—and lame—reference to an eye chart.  We can’t make this stuff up.

Previously: InStyle did the same stupid thing about glasses as a fashion accessory.  When they stop writing about it, we’ll stop complaining about it.

Personality Not Necessary for Holiday Fun, Says Allure

From Allure’s “The Bewitching Hour,” December, comes some helpful advice for holiday parties:

“I put on a really fun disco-y Dolce & Gabbana dress.  It makes me feel as if I’m someone else,” [“nightlife empress” and Bungalow 8 owner Amy] Sacco says.

Because, you know, being yourself simply isn’t enough. 

But in the unlikely event your outfit isn’t quite capable of transforming you into someone more fascinating, there’s still hope.  Sacco continues:

“And don’t forget the jewelry.  Add a little sparkle, especially if you don’t feel as of you have a sparkling personality that evening.”

Oh, okay.  Good to know that if our personality (and wardrobe) is lacking, we can still make up for it with our accessories.  Cheers!

A Bazaar Reason to Save Our Pennies

Bazaar’s “Hottest, Newest, Latest: Great Finds,” June, promotes a $160 bow-tied belt from Jovovich-Hawk:

It’s hard to resist adding another belt to your wardrobe, especially one this budget-friendly.

That’s a joke, right?  $160 for a belt seems the polar opposite of budget-friendly to us. Seriously, that much money for a belt? Is it hand-crafted from the skin of a unicorn and is the buckle plated in platinum? Because otherwise, we’re not sure that price is justified. Or at all justifiable.

Though we find the belt’s price completely unmanageable (for us—wealthy fashionistas, spend away!), we resent that the belt is presented as an exceptionally well-priced item, which could be true for only a tiny portion of Bazaar’s readers.

Are we out of line? Perhaps a designer’s perspective on the matter will enlighten us. Here’s what Phillip Lim says on the next page in “Designer Watch”:

“I’m making clothes that look like they could work in a designer market, but they’re for people with day jobs, bills, and other things they want to spend their money on.”

Oh, got it. Apparently our expectations are indeed out of whack, because Lim’s supposedly down-to-earth collection includes a $575 jacket, a $196 belt, and $920 boots. Pricy, but his belt makes the Jovovich-Hawk one a tremendous bargain in comparison.

Exactly what kind of “day jobs” do Phillip Lim’s potential customers hold down? (Or should we ask exactly how out of touch Lim is with reality?) Because we too would like the kind of job that allows us to purchase a $798 tote and still have the bulk of our cash for other things.

Then again, maybe it’s just a matter of priorities.  If we hadn’t spent $3.50 on this issue of Bazaar, we’d be that much closer to owning one of his pieces.  Only $794.50 to go!

Shopping Online Now Even More Expensive

From Bazaar’s “Hottest, Newest, Latest,” March:

Get clicking!  Bottega Veneta now has online shopping.

Because the only thing stopping you from buying that $900 purse was having to make the trek to Barneys.

Photo of Bottega Veneta’s Spring 2006 runway show courtesy of Style.com