74 comments

  1. The Domina

    July 17, 2008 at 8:48 am

    I don’t like the trousers at all…they make her crotch look long and her legs look stumpy, the rest though is quite put together without being stuffy.

  2. Carolina Lange

    July 17, 2008 at 8:55 am

    So elegant!

  3. Jorge from W Palm Beach

    July 17, 2008 at 9:23 am

    Van Noten is one of the few designers who manage to keep producing their collections without having to sell their names to the large fashion conglomerates, and therefore can afford to keep their original ideas and actually manufacture them. If you are going to push up your sleeves, I would rather see this cardigan/soft shirt combination than a more formal jacket- by nature more rigid. I am afraid I dont have much to say on the slacks, except, again, if you beat your own drum, you can put your ideas out there. I absolutely love the proportions of the shoes, and, having seen Van Noten’s shoes in stores (can’t afford them yet!) I know they are of impeccable construction and VERY soft suede. My birthday is coming up… Jorge from W Palm Beach

  4. gingerdan

    July 17, 2008 at 9:30 am

    I find the trousers very unflattering – a bit too much like pyjamas!

  5. Anonymous

    July 17, 2008 at 9:34 am

    i adore her anodyne expression.

  6. VIVI

    July 17, 2008 at 10:16 am

    I miss some heels in this look, it will be better with pumps.
    Kisses
    Vivi

  7. Rebecca

    July 17, 2008 at 10:26 am

    Yes the trousers remind me of scrubs.

    The sweater/shirt, however, combination is wonderful! I often wear a similar style!

  8. Anonymous

    July 17, 2008 at 11:02 am

    The proportions throughout here are perfect. I like the largish pants paired with the much more fitted top half. And the pants are just the right length–any longer, and they’d look sloppy.

    I remember with great nostalgia how back in the 80′s more women dressed this way. I think now it takes some balls (for lack of a better term) to wear such a masculine look without adding heels or something else that is overtly feminine.
    Props to her!

  9. Anonymous

    July 17, 2008 at 11:12 am

    Pretty face, the waist down is not flattering. This is the kind of thing that makes people hate fashion. It’s so arbitrary. If she were at your neighborhood garden center, people would think those pants were a disappointment compared the the polished look waist up. But in this context people like it? Come on.

  10. mirjamoieneiksund

    July 17, 2008 at 11:17 am

    I like it!

  11. Anonymous

    July 17, 2008 at 11:25 am

    I love the top half of the outfit! I could see the bottom half working maybe if she rolled the pant cuffs or something- and put on better shoes. I’m just not really a fan of that pant length- way too much like my high school marching band uniform. Actually, those pants look exactly like the bottom half of that thing- only in black polyester. (shudder)

  12. suzanne nelson

    July 17, 2008 at 11:25 am

    Love the colours and her beautiful face. The man’s watch and signet ring are nice details. This photo proves the old adage that good shoes make an outfit.

  13. Anonymous

    July 17, 2008 at 11:28 am

    A great example of transgender-nerd chic, assertively worn. Bravo!

  14. Anonymous

    July 17, 2008 at 11:43 am

    Love the top half (would be great with a tight pencil skirt), but the entire bottom half is extremely unflattering. I would have loved to see a flowy cropped white cotton blouse with maybe high heeled sandals instead, but at the end of the day the pants are just too darn big.

  15. lintmag

    July 17, 2008 at 11:44 am

    The outfit would be great except for the socks! I like the contrast of wearing menswear with something much more feminine (heels or sandals), but at least a bit of ankle would make it more summery.

  16. Anonymous

    July 17, 2008 at 12:21 pm

    I must say this woman wears this look as well as possible, but those trousers are still really ugly and unflattering. They make her look much shorter and heavier than she really is.

  17. pier andrea

    July 17, 2008 at 12:36 pm

    all due respect: what, exactly, is the point here?

    ciaofrommilan

  18. angie

    July 17, 2008 at 12:36 pm

    Oh no. Not a good look. The pants are awful.

  19. Anonymous

    July 17, 2008 at 12:48 pm

    This blog is like going on vacation for me. Although the city in which I live is a very wealthy one, it has a strong “Stedford Wives” atmosphere. So many women dress alike here that I hardly ever notice what anyone is wearing. Having stated that, I love this look because she is comfortable in it and it is not the “norm”. I find her to be an elegant women. I like the way that she has accesorized the outfit, the pinky ring, the necklace, the watch. I would not wear the pants, but I appriciate why she chose them! I mostly love her hair cut. It really shapes her face. I LOVE when a women expresses her individuality through her clothes, to me that is the whole point of fashion. Otherwise everyone should just walk around in a brown sack!

    • Lizz DeLera

      September 27, 2012 at 4:21 pm

      you don’t happen to live in Dallas, do you? I am not from here (from the east coast) but live here now…and there is most definitely a “Stepford Wives” feeling to the women…interesting that in some cities the women are very individual, and in other cities they seem quite homogenous…

      i wonder why that is? some places embrace & celebrate “sameness,” while some celebrate individuality?

  20. Anonymous

    July 17, 2008 at 1:56 pm

    I often find the fashion depicted here quirky and feel as though, by your noticing it and capturing it in a picture, it looks more “right” than I would think if I saw it on the street.

    But in this case, I confess that I don’t get it. Not only does this outfit seem odd and ill-fitting, I can’t see the artistry and elegance in it.

    I would very much like more commentary from you, The Sartorialist, as to what makes the particular look work.

  21. Maggie May

    July 17, 2008 at 2:10 pm

    waist down its very blase and unflattering. the black/lightblue/black again doesn’t work at all.

  22. Anonymous

    July 17, 2008 at 2:25 pm

    this is great , really ; however, i think it would be better with a different pair of shoes , flats or not i think her feet look too bulky , but otherwise; love the fitted top/ baggy bottom look, & normally i dont go for socks but i think after all this no sock business its time to bring them back

  23. Anonymous

    July 17, 2008 at 2:27 pm

    I’m actually not very fond of this look, she looks a bit frumpy to me…

  24. Laurence John

    July 17, 2008 at 2:51 pm

    to wear trousers that aren’t obviously flattering but have an artisan elegance gives her an intellectual coolness.

  25. SpanishGent

    July 17, 2008 at 2:52 pm

    Stylish but not very flattering.

  26. K.B.

    July 17, 2008 at 3:10 pm

    Okay, I want that cardigan and blouse.

    The pants not so much, but the cardigan is very nice — I’m trying hard to see the details. (And being a knitter, I’m thinking, “Can I copy that? I need a closer look!”)

    As for the pants, something tailored would be okay, or something a little loose and drapey, but these just look like they don’t fit.

  27. Miguel

    July 17, 2008 at 3:19 pm

    I love the look, the pose and specially the accesories… oh! that watch and that ring… Great compliments…

  28. Anonymous

    July 17, 2008 at 4:06 pm

    LOVE this… thank you!!!!

  29. hypoglycemiagirl

    July 17, 2008 at 5:20 pm

    so. hot.

  30. Olaf Germany

    July 17, 2008 at 6:04 pm

    You shot her once before. A great style…the intellectual sister of Inès de la Fressange. Her shoes are YSL Mens, I wear them too.

  31. vavavinny

    July 17, 2008 at 6:14 pm

    I’m sorry, but I am not loving this overall look. There is something just too ill-fitting and out of place about the pants. From the waist up, she looks fine. The pants and the sweater and peter-pan collared button down are just not the proper accoutrements to such pajama-y trousers. In the end, however, due to the clash, there is something quirkily likable about this woman.

  32. william

    July 17, 2008 at 6:15 pm

    I like the idea of this but it wasn’t executed carefully enough. The pants and shoes make her look sloppy and man like rather than fashionably androgynous.

  33. Anonymous

    July 17, 2008 at 6:16 pm

    No, I don’t care for this look at all. It just looks strange . . . sorry.

  34. Anonymous

    July 17, 2008 at 6:22 pm

    lovely shoes!

    and i *do* like those trousers. with the fitted top, they’re creating an asymmetry that i’m really enjoying.

    as for all the people talking about how unflattering they are, think about other pieces deemed fashionable – sack-like dresses that make women look pregnant or figure-less, and gladiator sandals, which hide ankles and create stumpy legs everywhere. at least this woman looks unique!

    good eye!

  35. Iheartfashion

    July 17, 2008 at 7:31 pm

    It seems dropped-crotch trousers are popping up all over Europe. Wonder how long it will be before they appear widely stateside.

  36. Sojie

    July 17, 2008 at 7:39 pm

    Don’t you just love that pose? Hell YEAH! With attitude like that, who even cares what she’s wearing.

  37. alice

    July 17, 2008 at 7:53 pm

    Oh, I just love her anodine expression!

  38. Anonymous

    July 17, 2008 at 8:14 pm

    I’m afraid I don’t see anything here that is special or atractive. I think the pants just look dumpy.

  39. froggy_grow

    July 17, 2008 at 9:17 pm

    Reminds me of that famous Otto Dix portrait of Sylvia von Harden. I love her look . . . and if I saw her at the garden store, as one commented above, I would still admire this look.

  40. Je Ne Sais Quoi

    July 17, 2008 at 9:18 pm

    A little boring.

  41. zuccotto

    July 17, 2008 at 11:26 pm

    Even I, who likes sloppy pants and am not as fashion moment tuned as many, don’t get the pants, except as a counterpoint to gang low slungs.. but then, why?

    But I’ll back off, as I like play re clothes, and this is probably some kind of play.

  42. Anonymous

    July 18, 2008 at 12:10 am

    The pants and shoes are so cool and make the look. Who cares if they are flattering or not?

  43. designerman

    July 18, 2008 at 12:32 am

    After all the high heels, floaty fabrics, bright colors – this looks brave and cool.

  44. Anonymous

    July 18, 2008 at 12:39 am

    the crotch is just wayyy too low on those pants for a woman, baggy or not.

  45. Anonymous

    July 18, 2008 at 2:00 am

    she looks confident and elegant. Great personality!, although the pants are not the best choice for her.

  46. androgynous

    July 18, 2008 at 2:41 am

    she’s got a lean and structured face so visually most will assume she’s lean underneath the wide pants anyway. I love the look.

  47. Anonymous

    July 18, 2008 at 4:14 am

    It kinda bothers me that people are breaking her look in halves…but if I must, the top half would look like my first grade teacher if it was not for the bottom half, and the bottom half would look like a clown if it was not fot the top half. Result? Pulled together the ‘halves’ actually make an impecable look!!! Brilliant.

  48. Anonymous

    July 18, 2008 at 4:34 am

    an outfit that does not leave a doubt, i would say…! i like her consequent androgynous look with the men’s signet ring, the men’s watch and last not least the cool hair cut. i guess it neither tries nor is intended to be elegant or feminine, but is just a very cool and self-assured look for a seemingly very cool woman.

  49. Anonymous

    July 18, 2008 at 5:38 am

    I agree with laurence john…. she looks terrific -

  50. Danielle Sylvie Taylor

    July 18, 2008 at 6:34 am

    Way too low in general.

    Would’ve looked lovely with baggy but more tailored slacks, or a long skirt.

    I can understand going for a WTF factor, as I sometimes do, but in this case it strikes me more as a, ‘damn, almost perfect’ rather than, ‘so unique!’ She’s trying too hard.

  51. victime de la mode

    July 18, 2008 at 7:17 am

    Very strange…
    But interesting character.

  52. Anonymous

    July 18, 2008 at 9:20 am

    She looks great. Love the hair, the stance and the androgynous look. However, not entirely sold on the trousers, might be better with lighter socks possibly? But otherwise fantastic.

  53. LordGQ

    July 18, 2008 at 10:04 am

    The top is nice. It’s elegant. Problem is the bottom! It looks like a pyjama! It would have been nicer if she wore skinny pants, I think.

  54. Nina

    July 18, 2008 at 10:05 am

    She looks a bit like Innes de La Fressange, but with a total diferent style.

  55. Alice Olive

    July 18, 2008 at 10:44 am

    Love the deep vee of the sweater and then the buttoned-up white shirt. And of course, her hair. Tousled.

  56. Anonymous

    July 18, 2008 at 11:07 am

    doesn’t work for me but more power to her for the confidence.

  57. lucia

    July 18, 2008 at 11:42 am

    Ana.. always so charming!!

  58. Anonymous

    July 18, 2008 at 12:30 pm

    Great, almost Yohji Yamamoto inspired. I had to first open the large version to figure out it was a woman, but precisely this ambiguity makes this look work. The pants are absolutely great. And NO, we DO NOT need heels here. I hate this pseudo-androgynous look of putting together something very stylish, mens-wear inspired, and the spoiling it by putting on ridiculous heels…. this is cool as it is. More women should dare to dress this way!

  59. CULTURE CREATORS

    July 18, 2008 at 1:30 pm

    Fabulous shot!

    xCC

  60. Anonymous

    July 18, 2008 at 6:07 pm

    I'm a day late with this comment, but I just have to say: Try thinking inspiration, rather than criticism: it's more generous. And lateral, not literal: it's more fun! It's amusing to me that people want to divorce the top and bottom halves of this outfit because it's about the relationship between them: the fitted, classic, B&W, ladylike look above the waist is a counterpoint to the unstructured, risk-taking, subtly colored, androgynous look below the waist. If I consider the outfit as a composition I find lots of inspiration here.

  61. zose

    July 18, 2008 at 7:00 pm

    oh this is pleasnatly harking back to 80s androgyny, i love the whole thing and her “yeah, what?” kind of look.

  62. Rollergirl

    July 19, 2008 at 4:52 am

    Well I like it. It’s all about the pose and the courage of her convictions. I’d wear this!

  63. Amy

    July 19, 2008 at 9:58 am

    I hate this. The pants are wrinkle and unflattering and the top is frumpy. The shoes are way too “sensible” too. How is this even remotely chic?

  64. Anonymous

    July 20, 2008 at 7:46 am

    I love this. The pants remind me of the cool tomboy art-school girls I used to know in the late 80s/early 90s. No, I wouldn’t call them “flattering” but they are very cool. She blows me away.

  65. Anonymous

    July 20, 2008 at 8:23 am

    I think her pants look awful – I just wonder how long it will be before I love them and find them elegant ! It takes a while for the eye to get used to new proportions.

  66. Allen - East Hampton

    July 20, 2008 at 4:11 pm

    Great look, hair and photo. Better still if it was pulled together from some vintage finds, and not a pricey run-way ensemble.

  67. Anonymous

    July 21, 2008 at 1:59 am

    I hated this from a distance (those pants!), but when I looked at the closer shot the details got the best of me. The pale pin striping, and beauty of her confidence in wearing a somewhat shocking look really sold me. While I still hate the look of the shoes with the rest of the outfit, I think that the entire look is so uncalculated, and such a strong statement of personal style, which is precisely what this blog is about!

  68. Jaap van Vliet

    July 21, 2008 at 2:31 am

    In spite of the trousers she is elegant

  69. Laura

    July 21, 2008 at 12:35 pm

    Thank you, Sart, for your approval of this look! A woman who 1) is not a 20-yr old; 2) has short hair; 3) doesn’t feel the need to wear her trousers fitted in the common (in every sense of the word) way. A previous post got it dead right- there is a distinctly eastern flair to this look. I am biased, because I dress like this most days, but I find it a refreshing counter to the too-typically western look.

  70. Anonymous

    July 22, 2008 at 5:53 pm

    I don’t understand the debate about the pants here. They are deliberately fitted loose and low in the crotch, in contrast to the neat sweater/shirt combination, and she looks great.

  71. Anonymous

    July 28, 2008 at 7:03 am

    The combination of her woman-hips and the long rise of her man-pants in that color against her dark sweater make her upper half look off scale. She would have been better with slim white pants or maybe a jewel blue shade in a slim cut. Her head and slim arms don’t help this shot. Her back end must be voluminous in those things.

  72. steve

    August 1, 2008 at 12:07 am

    That IS Ines de la Fressange–isn’t it???

  73. Kilroy

    May 11, 2009 at 2:27 am

    There’s nothing appealing about this photo. The trousers look like pajamas.

Leave a comment