Saturday, September 23, 2006

It must be Fashion Week on Abbey-Roads...



Actually - it's "Glamorama" week at Dayton's-Marshall Fields - oops! Macy's now. At least Macy's continued "Glamorama" - a Dayton invention carried over when they acquired Marshall Fields. (I hate Macy's - never liked the store, not even in "Miracle on 34th Street", much less in "Auntie Mame" - those are old movies for you toddlers. And professionally speaking, the NYC flagship store was never done well and couldn't hold a candle to Dayton's in it's golden age with Andrew Markopolous - I was there!)

Anyway, a co-worker whom I respect, whose sister worked for - I believe - Calvin Klein in NYC and whose mother looks like a jet-set fashionista, (Neither would endorse these designs.) approached me with the idea of selling modest fashions in our Store. He directed me to his friends website. This site and the other I will refer to both look so 1950's and dated, it's hard to imagine they would attract anyone under 70 years old.

This white dress photo is representative of the fashions they offer - made in Vietnam - by who? For how much money Kathy Lee? It looks like 'farmer in the dell' clothing. I know modest clothes are hard to come by, but I'd rather have my wife or daughter go vintage than buy clothes that look like this. These are not fashionable clothes. If a young girl or young woman were to wear these she would look like the late Queen Mother from the British Royal Family.

Anyway - there is no way we will be selling or promoting clothes like these anytime soon. We stop at chapel veils.

Another co-worker, well a couple of them, also like this site "She Maketh Herself Coverings" - the site is so lame I can't bring myself to post any photos. Looking at these sites makes me think of my friends who joined a community called Hutterite Bretheren - I always asked them, "Do you have to wear those outfits?" I mean it's bad enough that they left the Church to join a Protestant group, but the clothes...

I think some Catholics must be headed in that direction as well. They claim to be offering fashionable clothes, but fashionable when?

Well, I did it, I told my co-worker I'd at least mention the website on my blog - I deleted the name out of respect for the proprietors. (I hope he doesn't make his wife dress like this! Gosh! It's just creepy! I'm going to our Christmas party just to talk to his mother and find out what's up with him - and I'll still be able to leave before the dinner.)

9 comments:

  1. Have you looked at the "Pure Fashion" website. I have a link to it. They used to have shows here in the Twin Cities, but I don't know anything about it.

    http://www.purefashionshow.org/

    (A recommendation from someone who has never been in fashion).

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous9:56 PM

    Hello,

    I know the fine people who started the store. They named the store based upon a statement by Bishop Sheen. The statement had something to do with faithful Catholic families having to swim upstream in the secular society of today. Most of the clothes they sell are quiet cute.

    Pax,

    Katie from St. Paul

    ReplyDelete
  3. Thanks Katie. I am sure the people who own the website are very good people. And as I said, there is a need for modesty in fashion.
    Thanks for setting me straight on the title and where the name came from. In marketing one always has to be aware of what a name suggests, andvery few would know the Bishop Sheen reference. I appreciate your comments.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Thanks Ray for giving the address of that site - it's better than what I've seen - at least it's contemporary. If I would have seen this first I wouldn't have posted what I did today or last night probably.
    The kids on the Pure Fashion site look like normal girls, not 'little house on the prairie'.

    ReplyDelete
  5. That's what I thought, Terry. And not 99 pound freaks, either!

    And I'd bet that the designs don't come from superstars, so the prices might be reasonable also.

    I'd forgotten that Regnum Christi/Legionaries of Christ were involved with "Pure Fashion."

    Pure Fashion no longer seems to have a Twin Cities presence.

    That no doubt can be explained by the fact that a certain cleric, currently residing a few miles from Faribault, banned RC/LoC from showing their faces around here.

    I certainly hope that the Appointments Commission currently back from vacation in Italy starts cleaning off their desks and getting those June appointments moving!

    Everything points north-northwest!

    ReplyDelete
  6. I have to say I'm a little shocked by this post. Fashion is purely a matter of opinion and personal taste. Modesty, yes. But within that parameter..who really cares? Now I don't care for Amish looking clothes or "Little House.." clothes but that's me. Some people do. Quite frankly, the dress you show is beautiful and I like it. We as Christian people are the ones who should be setting the trends and styles..not Dior, DKNY, Ralph Lauren and any other number of designers. Some of their stuff is currently very modest because being covered is currently in. When it goes out we'll be back to halter tops and mini skirts. You seem to think that because they're the fashion big shots that they know best. Wrong. Slaves to the world and personal taste is what they are. What if dressing in suits and hats came back in for men and long, victorian dresses for women? Would you have something to say about that? If YOU don't like it that's okay but don't rip down others who do and please, please don't make fun of those who make such clothing because they're trying to bring some decency back into our world. You owe them an apology for your comments. They're your opinion and this is your blog but you laughed them into next week. Not nice. But then again, this is all my opinion and tune in next time for more Soapbox Sermons from Lady Fett.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Lady Fett - la femme n'a aucun gout.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Seriously Lady F;
    The person who suggested the website to me said that these people wanted to present modest fashions for women, he said the site carried fashionable and modest clothing. I did not see anything remotely resembling fashion - or anything close to a fashionable look.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Fashion according to what standards? The worlds? Yeah you prolly didn't see much of that fashion. But how about that of Christianity? Decent, covered, beautiful, feminine? Yep..lots of that! I think your standards are skewed. No offense bud! (:

    ReplyDelete


Please comment with charity and avoid ad hominem attacks. I exercise the right to delete comments I find inappropriate. If you use your real name there is a better chance your comment will stay put.