Son fringe, et sa robe est mignon – ses godasses sont affreux.
Transl: Cute bangs, cute dress – godawful shoes.
Also, this is a legit question for Scott. Do you want this comment column to be a debate about your photos? I like looking at your camerawork, and I respect it, but I get the impression that sometimes the posters here just fawn without any critical reflection as to whether or not the person or outfit in the pic is tasteful, interesting or beautiful. I kind of feel like I would be going against the grain if I posted that something was “ugly” or “tasteless.”
Street Tailors, I agree with your reply 100%, but I don’t think that’s what JM is asking. I think the question they pose is, Are Scott’s readers inclined to simply ‘love’ everything he posts? For fear of backlash, or blacklisting from future comments? I’m replying to this thread, but just below this reply you’ll see my original comment. I’ve posted some comments that have been less than thrilling, as has others. I think as long as people are constructive and respectful they should be honest. I also think that fashion and style is SO subjective, as you mentioned, anyone can find the beauty and brilliance in many different things. For myself, if I don’t like a particular subject, I do find myself tempering slightly with the people who truly might love what they see in mind.
That is what I am asking. I get the feeling sometimes that everyone who reads this simply gushes sycophantically because anything that Scott posts couldn’t possibly be ugly, in poor taste, or uninteresting. Like style, the very nature of blogging is subjective – Scott chooses who to shoot, and presumably, he chooses who to post.
Again, I am looking for friendly debate in order to hone style, and I would be the last person to argue with “de gustibus non disputandum est.”
I still think the white shoes are hideous – and the context here is so influential. If anyone saw them on the sale rack at Payless I doubt there would be a stampede to buy them.
You think that everyone that posts here should be trying to find things they want to criticize? I doubt Scott will bother answering you, but if I didn’t like Scotts work I wouldn’t be here. Thats why I mostly have only positive things to say. Obviously there are always some negative comments, but NO ONE wants to come to the comment section and see a whole bunch of negativity. It is fine to say that things are not to your taste, but “tasteless” “ugly” are not OK comments. What makes you think anyone would enjoy that? The best thing is if you don’t like someone’s work, then say nothing.
with this last comment.
Actually, the posters do say if a certain style is unappealing, I did so myself last week. I (and many others) said that I did not like this particular outfit, but i commend his bravery for making a strong statement with his fashion. Last month there was a debate over a shot of a girl on a skateboard. What I like about this blog is that there is a respect for individual style – what is tasteless for some is tasteful for others. As such, people tend not to get personal or insulting in their comments. Most of the comments are constructive critiques. As soon as that changes and we start hurling insults like “god awful, ugly, and making value judgements like “tasteless”, I will be leave this blog.
Well said. I don’t want to be part of a nasty-fest either.
Those who accuse others of fawning or sycophancy may wish to consider one simple idea: that others may, in fact, simply see things differently than they do. It may be hard to believe (and lord knows I honestly don’t understand why others may find certain looks or fashion personalities *cough ADR cough* appealing), but others may actually find beauty in things you dislike. Also, bear in mind that many of us frequently refrain from making negative comments for one simple reason: we don’t feel that that ordinary folks (unlike self-appointed fashion “personalities”…) should be publicly taken to task for wearing things that we simply don’t find appealing. Should I ever be lucky enough to be photographed by Mr Schuman, I would prefer not to have my look called “ugly” or “tasteless” or be raked over the coals merely because it doesn’t meet someone else’s idiosyncracies, so I try to refrain from doing the same.
But that’s it – it’s all about context and personal style, no? Who knows where the subject got her shoes – she has the style wherewithall to create a look out of it. I might not have seen the shoes on the rack and imagined the same look. That’s what’s inspiring and eye-opening to me!
I rather enjoy talking about this stuff as well. Challenging the status quo is what moves things forward! And by the by, I think that by “tagging” her shoes with the Rick Owens label really detracts from what (I would hope) is the purpose of the blog. It shouldn’t matter that they are Rick Owens, or Dries van Noten or Payless; you should compliment someone on their style because it speaks to you, not because you saw it on the runway and can identify it as “covetable” as dictated by Women’s Wear Daily.
I don’t see how a negative comment in any way illuminates anything, but If you don’t like something feel free to say so. Hopefully without accusing those of us who disagree with you of fawning. We simply like the majority of the photos and outfits. I would not come here otherwise. And your being negative to Cloth&Skin for the comment of where the shoes come from is also in bad taste. That comment was useful, telling people where the shoes come from. No need to read into it to try and make your point.
I don’t really think that the point of these photos is the intrinsic beauty of the clothes, but more the overall affect they have on the picture. In this case I think the shoes add to the photo because of the way she looks elongated. The dress in combination with the shoes give her an oddly unnatural length. What I do find so ironic, is that your post asking about debate, has caused something of a debate.
I had the same reaction, she’s lovely and the dress is great, but the shoes make her feet look deformed. Guess I’m a lot older than most of the people who comment here, but I can’t get used to a lot of the ultra high heels, which are often really ugly and look impossible to walk in.
I also agree that there is too much fawning commentary here.
Those shoes are platforms, and very comfortable to walk in. Its because the shoes do not force the feet to arch like horrid shoes with a totally flat sole. Its not the height of the heel, but the arch that are a problem for walking. Thats probably why platform shoes are so popular. But I really don’t know what you mean by deformed, or even who you are agreeing with. I don’t see anyone else saying this.
Wendy Sacks, I consider myself “older” than probably the typical reader of “The Sartorialist” also, and I’m a 58 year old female living in the Midwest. Like others who comment, I truly look forward to reading this blog daily. I’ve done so for around five years, yet have hesitated to comment in the past, for various reasons:
* There’s no doubt in my mind that I’ve made (and probably continue to make!) my
share of “fashion don’ts” in my lifetime — not by choice, but I shudder to think of
having a photo taken by The Sartorialist for anyone to view and comment on. I can
be critical of myself, but would hate to read what others had to say of a critical nature.
* I’ve become mature enough through the process of time to realize that like every-
thing else, fashion/ styles/hemline lengths/what is considered appropriate and so
on will change sooner or later. Ergo, what I find new or unusual will change in
time also, and if I find certain clothes or hairstyles a bit hard to wrap my mind
around today, I try to chill out and know that the teen with pink or green hair a
decade ago has probably changed to fit into whatever career they’re working in today.
And if not, that’s their business, not mine.
* It has been pointed out to me years ago that I could be pretty judgmental, so I
try to temper my opinions with a couple of sayings I was raised with, such as
“Variety is the spice of life….”
“It would be a dull world if everyone was the same.” And really, don’t we have
enough conformity in too many aspects of life, already, without all dressing in
the adult equivalent of school uniforms so no one “stands out”?
“If you can’t say something nice, don’t say anything at all.”
No worries here…ther is lots of stuff that I really personally think is awful. But thats my personal opinion and I consider my post as part of all the comments. And I feel like people comment respectful thats it…but still disagree. For instance I was gonna say about this one: I love her pose, her face, her expression, the dress…and then there are these shoes…they make me cringe
Actually, considering that its a street style blog and these are simply people you see on the street, I would think only a very rude person would even consider saying something is tasteless or ugly. You can say you don’t like it. But as Scott is a master photographer, and very seldom takes an ugly picture, mostly people simply honestly like his work. Why else would they be here? To criticize?
JM, I will be honest and say that before stumbling across this blog, I have never heard of Scott.
As you’ve stated, style is very subjective. There is so much about fashion trends and what’s hot for the up coming season, blah blah blah! What gets lost in all of this fashion talk is developing your own style and being comfortable in that. Judging from her eye contact with the camera and her beautiful smile, she is very comfortable in her style.
Do you ever notice how much we rely on “validation”? Look at how you rated her, instead just enjoying the subjective nature of the photograph. You don’t get it, it doesn’t agree with your individual taste but to her, she is rockin the sh*t out of this outfit!
People will spend HOURS shopping for the right outfit and shoes. They will spend MORE hours getting ready to wear that outfit and for what? For them to find confidence in the fact that someone said “you look wonderful!”? To me, this blog combines excellent photography with people who obviously don’t need to wait around for compliments and validation.
Sorry to be tagging on a little late – saw this and got me thinking.
To begin with I wouldn’t say its unfair to state that sometimes responses on this blog are fawning or without critical reflection as you have phrased. However I think it is important to realise the difference between a comment being negative/positive in tone and critical/uncritical or throw away.
By this I mean that to say “cute bangs, cute dress – godawful shoes” is no more critical than “OMG I love this outfit!” Sure a negative response may appear to go against the grain within a sea of seemingly unequivocal thumbs up, but this doesn’t equate to being any more critical. I am not trying to suggest that people’s impulse reactions are of any less value than any other response, more that statements declaring whether you like or dislike something does not directly translate onto opposing ends of a scale of critical observation.
In the 3rd response to this image, the poster states “…I love how she combined the black dress with white heels…” – albeit within a wholly positive reply it is one that does give some indication of reasoning behind the observation, which I would argue equates to a more critical response than “Cute bangs, cute dress â€“ godawful shoes”.
For my own two cents on why I like Scott’s work (without reference to any specific photo or outfit)… Firstly I recognise that he isn’t the first and in this day and age of the photographic image (being at its most disposable and accessible) by no means the only street fashion photographer. So what is it that makes his work special?… for me?
Any photographic image is firstly defined by the discernment of the eye and creative decisions of the photographer, but within the saturation of street style photography that we have readily before us, Scott’s images somehow seem to present the subjects/individuals on what you feel might be their own terms… Or perhaps in a way where the individual and the moment are intrinsic to each other. Even when the subject is aware of the camera, there is something momentary (or essential of the moment) to these images – I feel it is this that differentiates Scott’s work from those which are simply looking to document ‘a style’ or ‘a look’.
It is about a perspective of fashion which somehow possesses both a greater level of intimacy and yet operates on a wider or broader social and cultural scale.
Bill Cunningham is often seen as a reference point or grand precursor to the Sartorialist; however as much of an understandably recognised father of street fashion photography and as interesting as Cunningham’s photographs may be beyond documents of style, he has stated that he doesn’t see the people he photographs – “All I am interested in is the clothes”. On the flip-side I think what makes Scott’s images so interesting is a sense of the inseparable nature of the clothes, the wearer and the moment in which the image is taken. So as much as I see a path from Cunningham I see one from Cartier-Bresson, Sander and Leipzig.
Given the proliferation of disposable images and disposable fashion we are regularly exposed to, in conjunction with our ease of accessibility to information – I feel the importance of the presence of the Sartorialist to be particularly great at this moment in time.
Anyway! it wasn’t my intention for this to become an essay, (although I do have a tendency to ramble!) so I’ll cut myself dry now. I’d like to end on this though – all great images are made of their own time, for their own time, but will resonate beyond their moment of inception through the perpetual experiences of future audiences.
There is nothing to do: French women are always one step ahead of all in style! StunningGreat shot! Love everything: Love the color mix – black&white – love the dress line and the cut out, love the shoes, well-aimed! And even the hair cut is adorable and fits perfectly with her look!
This photograph is so nice that I can’t capture it. I just enjoy looking at it. To make an artist such as myself NOT want to capture it through pencil and pour it on paper is something I can’t explain because I love drawing the human form. I simply love your frozen moments in time. It’s just a crazy photograph, wOw! I say crazy for lack of a better term because to go in depth would be too much.
Love the dress and I’m a definite fan of bangs. They are so fresh ! But the colors in the photo,( of course the black / white combo ), but its really the green trees that bring the whole thing to life.
More than the girl in the foreground, I’m interested by the man wearing a skirt. That’s very “avant-garde” to me and I love it when it’s well done like in this case.
I love the color saturation and the depth of the background.
Scott, everyday I’m expecting something more amazing and you never fail !
Like Kanye West said: That’s that sh#t I don’t like. I agree, why do people fawn over everything. It’s always the same people with their web links inserted in their comments. Call a spade a spade. If the Emperor has no clothes, ignore it or tell him he has no clothed. Don’t fawn and tell him how magnificent it is.
What is appealing is all the opposites in the comp; open back dress, closed back heel to ankle, black vs. white, 3/4th of her back and 3/4th front view of her face, the perfect perpendicular of the two figures, the light valued smooth ground vs. the dark textured top half of the background.
I like the vague “S” shape of her pose as well. It creates a nice subtle tension. I almost feel like she is slightly off balance and at risk of falling.
I don’t agree that taste is merely subjective. If there is no objective good taste or bad taste then surely there is no taste at all. “Good” and “bad” are real values, not just what we as individuals decide they are.
I don’t like these shoes at all although I can see how they are contributing to a certain interesting look. A wedge is questionable unless it is an espadrille, but the wedge combined with the unflattering wide ankle wrap is worse, and that strap is on all sorts of summer sandals. I am waiting patiently for it to go out of style.
The most compelling element of her outfit is her smile……and I love the outfit……confirmation that beautiful women can be found anywhere in the world….. all shapes, sizes,colors……………that works for me.
Good look SS
This probably won’t be popular…but….I love women in summer dresses that show their arms and their backs….and I am glad to see one that is not littered with tattoos. I know those are an individual choice and each person has the right to express themselves in any way they want. For many, I assume, a tattoo has an esoteric meaning. That’s fine. For me, most of them don’t look good.
Wow – I find it striking that people get so offended at my saying that I don’t like someone’s shoes. It fortifies my point about context. The content here has been curated for us. In a similar way that Robert Parker tells you to taste cherries or licorice in a wine, the Sartorialist has posted pictures that speak to him, asking you to find something intriguing about them. I am not sure that the purpose is for commenters to simply praise what they see, rather to describe what they see and how it affects them. If something strikes someone as visually unpleasant, then they have every right to say so, clearly and plainly. There is no ad hominem attacking here….nor will there ever be, on my part at least.
I appreciate the minimal sporty look she styled for day, getting mileage out of a dress some would reserve for evening. One of the oldest original purchases in my closet is a now vintage dress which is a doppelganger for this one from the back. I wore that dress frequently but have not worn it in years. I liked many of the black and white Tron inspired looks from a few seasons ago and this feels like a nod to that techie-sporty aesthetic.