Tuesday, October 26, 2010

Dressing the Celebs: Round 1

Okay, okay, I'll get around to recapping winery visits tomorrow. Also - was thinking I'd CHEERS my local tiny corner market this week as a salute to their fantastic, unusual, hard-to-find bubbly selection. The Tiny Corner Market Wine Man has tastes that are pretty much identical to mine.

Later. Later.

For now: Was cruising through some Project Runway recaps (don't watch the show, but like catching photos of the collections afterward) and actually decided the Michael C stuff is VERY wearable, I love the dusty color palate and there are a handful of ladies I'd like to dress in his creations. Tom and Lorenzo can rip on his lack of originality, but to me, all of these feel like straight-to-red-carpet confections that I'd love to see a real person (you know, without Light Socket Hair) strike a pose while wearing....

For starters:


This was a gorgeous color. Rosy champagne. Reminds me of a piece of candy, or of a perky meringue cookie once it's cooled off. Or rosy cheeks after being outside or something. Either way....while I'm not crazy about the flared hem, I think I'd LOVE it on Anna Kendrick.


This girl knows how to strike a pose. Rarely slouches. Is teeny tiny and would give something like this the requisite amount of attitude to keep the soft, draped bodice upright, rather than saggy. She likes herself some pastel mini-dresses. She usually chooses things that either wash her out, or make her look like she belongs on the Icecapades. She has no idea how to match her shoes to her dress. But she'd look downright regal in this number.

Next!

I saw this and hated it on a blonde model. Or, more properly, loved the dress, am a sucker for anything asymmetrical, trite though that may be by now, and I thought the contrast of the flirty, prohibition-era-lampshade-skirt and more structured top were just photo-perfect. But ALL WRONG on a blonde. The top of the dress is peachy-pale.....don't put in on someone who's fair up top - give it the benefit of some punchy contrast. And it needs someone with a small bust, and -- I think -- someone a little on the petite side, lest the miles of legs exiting the bottom of the lamp shade will leave things feeling unbalanced. Someone like....Natalie Portman:


First things first: she always nails the shoes. Knows when to go with a nude shoe to draw attention to the dress, and when to complement the dress with some splashy shoes. Goes for soft hair (which would be a graceful way to balance out the a symmetry of the top with the swooshiness (new word) of the bottom). Notice how I closed both of those parenthesis? Good job, Heather. Somewhere, a list of new year's resolutions is smiling. Anyway. Natalie. She's not afraid of a short skirt OR a dress with some structure. Tends to look best when she's not lost in yards of fabric or anything too boho. Terrific clavicles for something like this (where the strength of your shoulders is the whole focal point upon which the dress hangs).

And more swooshiness!

This one took me awhile. I loved it immediately -  loved how it managed to look both ethereal and tactile at the same time. Loved the way the color would flatter almost any complexion. Liked the unexpected peak of leg and the way it was just body-conscious enough up top to make the voluminous bottom seem gradual, rather than bag-like. Was just hard to figure out who should wear something like this. Finally decided there is, in fact, someone I want to see in LESS structured dresses, looking a little softer, a little less like a Carolina Herrera prisoner. Renee Zellwegger. 


Not crazy about the girl and her shiny, Botoxed, siliconed, cheek-implanted face or her bowl cut 'do or her squint. BUT, it would be an unexpected change of pace for Mrs Please Take Your Hooks Out of Bradley Cooper and Release Him Back to the Rest Of Us. And I'm tired of seeing her in yoga pants and yoga pants only. We need an excuse to parade her out onto the red carpet again and soften her up. While we're at it, we'll powder her face a little. It looks painful, the pink shiny-ness.

More fringe skirts:

I do like this one on a blonde. Keeps it light up top, gives the bodice some impact. Can't help being a sucker for how soft and touchable the fringed skirt looks. Like the detailing up top, don't even mind how deliberately the belt matches the shoes (feels like one of those Man Designer mantras that's hard to abandon, even when you're dressing women). Would love to see it on Carey Mulligan:

On the one hand, I generally like the way she styles herself. There's something contemporary in her generally vintage-inspired looks that agrees with me. She looks clean, unfussy, natural, age-appropriate. But the thing that gets me: her hem length. She chooses a dowdy length EVERY. TIME. Mid-calf doth not flatter many, and if you're going with an old-lady tea-length skirt, at least have the good sense to pair with sky-high heels to give yourself a precious few extra, necessary inches. Which is why that frothy little fringed number up there would be such a welcome change for lil Carey. It plays up a lady's waist, gives the gams some airtime (I'm being painfully, uncharacteristically alliterative today. Gag). Looks young and confident and fresh and wearable. Nothing too trendy, just cute. Like lil Mulligan.

You'd put that on WHO?
I'll give Michael C credit for tackling shoes very well. Understated, interesting, nothing so flashy that they become the main event. But this dress looks like it needs either a lighter, barely-there strappy number, or a deliberate, "it's no longer summertime" boot of some sort. The platform pumps feel like they abbreviate the lines on this dress a little bit. Speaking of lines - dig the way the lines at the neck mirror the lines of the belt at the waist. Like the way that the drapey sleeve has similar proportions to the drapey skirt. Makes the asymmetry feel surprisingly balanced. And there's something daring about how simple this is - no fussy straps or pendants or necklaces. It's clean. You know who could handle something clean with some natural, flowing movement? Hilary Swank. 

Because she doesn't know how to dress or style herself. Always too structured, too colorful, too evocative of wrapping paper, or prom, or Miss America. Her stabs at feminine feel awkward and contrived, her hair is usually too severe, too deliberate. But in the case of this dress, I feel like something with strong lines at the shoulders would complement her. And her hair could be starched and deliberate and severe and it would work - would let the dress to the talking. Still a softer look for her, but softer on her terms. 

And finally:
Who on earth, right???? It's an interesting concept. It's like Angry Rainbow. Or Queen Frostine On Acid. Or Princess of Pain or something. But with the ruffles and tiers, still manages to be somewhat delicate. Slap some pasties in there and I'd like to see it on Kelly Osborne. 

Really? Yep. Really. Word on the street is she's lost some weight and is having a delicious time showing it off. But she doesn't really know what to do with "it." What I do know: the sweetheart neckline and cinched waist work well for her. And something a little punk-pretty would suit her well. It would be demure for her recent run of sort of trashy pinup-chic looks. I'd pin her hair up in a little faux-hawk ponytail, give her an almost out-of-place sort of tough clutch and call it good. But we'd ditch the cuff bracelet from the runway. There's enough going on there not to warrant any accessories. Just some good eye makeup.

Sunday, October 17, 2010

Wine country recap, round 1...


First off: who's that smiling guy hanging out over my shoulder?

No idea.

Next question: how did he have the good sense to smile at precisely the moment that picture was being taken?

Again, no idea.

Final question: how much of a mea culpa do I need to issue after presenting myself as a slightly more avid wine-specific blogger in the tasting room of our new favorite winery before I stop feeling like quite such a fraud?

Answer: big, giant mea culpa. An also a huge THANKS to Mike Madigan, the wizard in the St Francis tasting rom who reminded me precisely what inspired me to begin this blog in the first place. And because I believe I'm less dedicated than he, here's what we ought to do as penance: we ought to visit him HERE.  Thanks, Mike, for some perfectly-timed inspiration back in the direction from whence this blog came.

I mean, truly, this did began as an ode to My Favorite Thing: The Bubbly. But then pop culture reared it's delicious head and all of a sudden (for 4 years and change) the goings on of Posh and Lindsay and Sister Wives somehow became that much more alluring.

But anyway - all tangential pop culture musings aside, I'm writing this from the middle of California Wine Country proper - the tourist-friendly Santa Rosa. We've wrapped up day 3......here's my report card:

Day 1 - We arrive.

No wineries, just great margaritas and old people dancing while old people sang. And it was great singing. Hit up the Ledson Hotel in downtown Sonoma for some "Welcome to wine country!" imbibing. There was live music in the form of ancient local crooners who managed better than Sinatra and had the charm of Dean Martin - and I'll never get tired of watching over dressed, "Hell-yes-I've-still-got-it-GIRLFRIEND-" styled grandmas try to charm the unsuspecting 30-something studs into a little late-night (8pm - !!!!) two-step. Too cute to pass up.

Also, points to the management at that lovely establishment for being genteel enough to charm us into drinks when we were otherwise inclined to go home and straight to bed. At 6pm. Whatever - we got up early.

Consumed: Schramsburg Rose. We both declared it delicious. Had some reservations before the first sip since I remember the Schramsberg brut being MUCH too chardonnay heavy and practically undrinkably buttery. Was pleasantly relieved - the rose was perfect. Bummer the Schramsberg tours are booked out for the rest of our visit.....next time, next time.

Day 2 - We get illegal.


But I'll get to that later. Mom hadn't been to Mumm, so we started the day out in Napa. Patio was booked, so we ended up indoors (bummer....). Have to declare Mumm sparklers underrated. Sure, they're no Domaine Carneros (.....they can't all be), but the Cuvee M and the Demi Sec were dependable and smooth, the DVX releases were deliciously mineral-heavy (describe a sparkling wine as "mineral-ee" and I'm sold). The sparkling Syrah was....better after we'd finished the others. Would recommend nixing that from a tasting flight because it pairs poorly. OR, everything that makes it distinct and exciting is lost when you sip it following anything off-dry. I'll say this about the winery: they could stand to invest in their tasting room staff a little more vigorously. They're the first representation of the winery most visitors receive....when they sound like they're reciting a tasting note crib sheet rather than participating in the tasting experience as enthusiasts....you lose something as a visitor.

Next stop: Domaine Chandon. The place we got illegal. Maybe I shouldn't broadcast our bill-dodging bent, but, frankly, when you walk into the tasting room equivalent of a frat house, you feel a little vindicated when you get even with the schmucks who ignored you by creeping out without paying for the ONE glass of bubbly you had to wait 15 minutes to order.

Bottom line: skip this place. The tasting room is mahem, the wines aren't any better than what you'll find at Mumm or Gloria Ferrer, and if I want to drive all the way to their winery to be completely ignored and then patronized....I'll choose someplace where the wine is tastier. Case in point: I ask the gentleman behind the counter what HIS favorite would be. Received in return: and eye roll and some pat response about wine being subjective and everyone's tastes being different.

Ya think?

This isn't my first rodeo, moron. I could give you eight different sparkling houses that would dance circles around your action.

Anyway - they poured us the wine, they disappeared.....and so did we. Glug glug. First time I've ever done this, by the way. Thanks, meat heads.

Stopped by Mondavi on our way out of town because it felt like a slice of classic Americana that I didn't want to miss. Steward poured generously and comped us a tasting. Probably the best Pinot Noir I've tasted (yes, Willamette Valley, that means YOU, too). Unexpectedly sweet (coming from me, that's a compliment). two thumbs up - the winery was striking, not crowded at 4pm on a Saturday (no kidding), the people were friendly....have nothing bad to say about these guys. There's a reason Mondavi was an Institution.

Day 3 - Rainy, with a chance of Malbec.


Woke up to rain. Hmm. Feels suspiciously like home. Waited it out for awhile, then struck out to Rutherford. Had never headed up much north of Windsor, was a beautiful drive out there.....stopped at Ferrari-Carano. Have loved their Viognier-like Fume Blanc for years - fruity, hint of something dry Riesling-esque, was fun to drink it with a view of such gorgeous gardens. The ladies in the tasting room were a little brusque, but the gentlemen downstairs in the reserve room much more gracious. The black muscat dessert wine was a treat....have never tasted anything quite like it.

Stopped at St Francis afterward since we've enjoyed that place every time we've visited. Thanks, Mike, for a great experience! Fun to bump into a fellow-blogger! Great people there.....consistently the friendliest, warmest, least intimidating staff, certainly the least likely to make us feel like morons. And we're insecure like that in a tasting environment. So, we're not huge Cab fans, we could do without the old vine Zins, we may have trouble articulating why we don't like that chardonnay, but we enjoy the tasting experience and love bumping into people in tasting rooms who treat us like guest and friends rather than idiots who don't know our AVAs from our asses. So cheers to St Francis - we'll be back!

Off to pizza for dinner.....and am hardly proofreading this, so if I'm typo-riddled, it's a vacation. I'm allowed.

Tomorrow - off to my favorites: Gloria Ferrer (for their gorgeous patio and a bottle of Va de Vi) and Domaine Carneros for some Le Reve and caviar. Blue skies, please!

Friday, October 8, 2010

Miley vs Polygamy vs Plastic Faces: we're not doing ourselves any favors, ladies.

I've been.....cogitating over the best way to articulate what it is about TLC's "Sister Wives" that really gets my ire up.....and because I didn't want to dedicate an entire post to some sort of aimless rant about the fact that the premise -- in general -- bothers me, I waited until I came up with a decent way to integrate my distaste into something a little more cohesive.

And it surprised me that I took this in the direction I did.... As an entertainment junkie, I'm usually the last to take anything to task that I see on TV or catch online - I tend to think it's harmless escapism, that we're reading too much into things like this to condemn them as having much negative impact -- its desensitization, maybe, and since I'm hip-deep in FLUFF most days, I write most of it off. But I started thinking about a recent deluge of news stories and celebrity-worship that actually amounts to a really damaging knock to women...we're completely surrounded by undermining influences - most of them women themselves.

Therefore: I've come up with a trifecta of vapid popular culture influences that do grave disservices to women. I don't take the high road and try to come up with a solution (it's Friday and I would prefer to think about the nice bottle of bubbly that just arrived from the wine club that I'll be sipping tonight....honestly), instead this is more of an expose on the fact that we betray our gender by supporting these hacks.

For starters:

We've got this horrific little snot Miley Cyrus out there who -- at 17 -- is trying desperately to sell herself as a sexy adult...and the generation of Disney kids that grew up watching her are now being subjected to her ridiculously sexual antics as though grinding on strangers in a club and being filmed in her undies, blindfolded on a bed is a "normal" part of growing up.

We've got the women of Sister Wives who are attempting to convince us that a polygamist lifestyle is "normal" and deserves to be brought out of its shame closet. These women have been so brainwashed they don't even realize what an insult it is to the rest of us to try to sell Americans on the idea that it's not a problem to share your man with as many other women as he wants, that it's not creepy to let your "husband" bedroom hop and add to his harem and knock up an entire congregation of willing dunces so long as "the kids are happy." Really? You didn't kiss him until the altar because you "don't kiss married men," but - correct me if I'm wrong - you have no problem sleeping with married men? Having married men's babies? Living with married men?

And then we've got the Kat-face Kardashians, an army of plastic females with fake lashes and fake hair and foreheads that are Botoxed to high hell while the women are still in their EARLY TWENTIES, and they're given enough media coverage the rest of us start to look at their masks of makeup and their surgically enhanced cheeks and their lipo jobs and their brow lifts and think its NORMAL and that we're SUPPOSED to want to look like that (and I won't even get started on the whole "reason" Kim and her cadre of fembot sisters are "famous" in the first place may have had something to do with being demeaned on camera....and we DO consider golden showers demeaning, right? Google it. Or don't. Please don't.).

Case in point: while sitting in traffic yesterday checking out my eye makeup in my vanity mirror I ACTUALLY had these thoughts:


Wow, my eyebrows really suck. If I could get eyebrow "plugs" I would. Totally lame eyebrows. I should definitely try out some fake eyelashes - those seem fun - like a dramatic way to detract from these weak eyebrows.

The disgusting thing about this train of thought: My eyelashes already look artificially long. My eyebrows are fine. I'm a pretty girl. There is NOTHING wrong with the face God gave me. HOWEVER, I've been so completely inundated with media images of artificial, plastic girls who are Photoshopped into para-human oblivion that I start to think NORMAL and HUMAN and NATURAL looks BAD.

Seriously.

And I'm so assaulted by images of undressed pop stars doing their little simulated sex gig in crazy clothes with crazy hair and crazy makeup and crazy heels and legions of crazy followers that I think its NORMAL that a teenage girl in a barely-there disco outfit and panties writhes around in a nightclub, in a limo, on a bed, attempting to sing and dance.....I see NOTHING wrong with that.

Holy pop tarts, pardon me while I come to the screeching realization that WOMEN are destroying WOMEN and go shoot myself in the non-Botoxed face, please.

Women are telling other women that our natural eyebrows, cheeks, lips and hair aren't good enough if you're going to be employable, marketable, magazineable.

Women are telling other women that there's "nothing strange going on" when they're sharing their husband and the father of their children with three other women and encouraging us not to see them as freaks, to give their lifestyle some credibility.

Really?

So we REALLY want to teach our children that its perfectly fine not to expect your husband to be wholly devoted to you and you to him, that it's a lifestyle decision to enter into some arrangement that means you're not entirely supported, cared for, not an equal PARTNER, and if you've only got 20% of someone's heart when you marry them, it's fine. That if he sleeps next to you two nights a week, that's good enough. That you're not worth 100% of his time, that you don't deserve 100% of his love, that your children don't deserve 100% of their father?

Seriously, LADIES.

We're doing this to ourselves. We're telling ourselves we're not pretty enough, that we don't deserve the best for ourselves and that we're only good for sex.

Behold: the reason I spent the rest of my drive home from work resenting what celebrity has done to women: