But it’s not just T-Lo. the rules for choosing accessories have changed dramatically in the last ten years, and I’m demmed if I can figure out what the new idea is here.
Ok, so seriosuly, how IS a person expected to choose a shoe-color these days? It can’t match the primary color of the outfit - OK, a little confusing to those of us in the “dyed-to-match” generation, but also refreshing and interesting.
It can’t match the complimentary colors in the beading of the outfit. - WTH?!? So, the beading has 3-4 complimentary colors in it, and you’re saying I can’t use any of them in the shoes because that’s “matchy.” OK, so should she go with Orange? Burnt Umber? Or is the bottom line that really only fuschia patent is going to get a good review and we should wear it with everything?!?
I know this sounds snarky, but it’s not, it’s really truly that desperately confused and pathetic. What, please, is the correct thought process to end with a “win”?
And let’s not forget the purse and bracelet, which can’t match the shoes or each other. WTH? Is there a global conspiracy to require us all to go out dressed as a rainbow? (Not that there’s anything wrong with that )
Anything “matchy-matchy” is considered really out right now. I think this is pretty dumb when taken to extremes, but I can see how more colors in the same color palette add visual interest.
I think a pink, orange, or yellow shoe in the same shiny fabric would be okay. Black patent would probably also be okay if a pump, or maybe a silver sandal (metallics can be neutrals and complement everything pretty well). I think that is a pretty tacky dress in general though, so why not go whole hog and wear bright fuchsia shoes? I think that was their main complaint, that she wore a flashy dress she obviously wasn’t comfortable in and made it boring.
I think the fashionistas want to make sure that photos from this era are looked at with a “what the hell were we thinking - fuchsia shoes with that dress?!” Which is the goal of fashionistas in any generation.
Thank God I’m too old for that and can just continue to dress like Audrey Hepburn. Yes, my black shoes match my little black dress. I wouldn’t be caught dead in a bright green dress to start with.
I think the matching shoe colour makes it look really pulled together, actually. Add another inch or so to the hemline so she doesn’t look like she’s concerned about flashing her goodies and I’d call this one a win.
LOL Dangerosa! I always quote her “I base my fashion decisions on what doesn’t itch.” I love monochromatic makeup (no metallic shine pelase, I am not a robot) and matte fabrics. I am all about cotton. And matching purse and shoes indicates forethought in my book. Not every bag needs to be a work of art.
But I do really want to understand what the new rule is. Does one look across the color wheel and then turn left?
I’m gonna venture a WAG that the (alleged) fashion error here is having such an exact match of such an unusual color.
There’s absolutely no reason to wear those shiny deep-violet shoes with that grass-green dress except that they’re precisely the same color as some of the beading, which IMHO suggests more of a “chorus girl costume” look than a “daring party outfit” look.
I vote with Time Stranger on the choice of a more neutral-looking silver over purple (though I’d prefer a pump rather than the sandal s/he suggested, preferably with a little texture and/or trim, and possibly more of a steel or pewter shade rather than bright metallic silver).
To me, that would say more “here are my pretty shoes that set off my bold dress nicely”, and less “look, I got my shoes dyed to perfectly coordinate with my dress trim, the other girls at the prom will be so jealous!!1”.
I have to agree with them on the shortening of the dress. In the close up the hem looks oddly rumpled, as if someone trimmed it and did a roll-up hem and then never pressed it.
This right here. It’s like you know she bought those shoes exactly to match with that dress and will only wear them as part of that costume. Also agreed with the others who say go for a neutral or metallic.
The shoes themselves are definitely better than the dress, but not a good pairing together.
I, too, would have paired the dress with a silver shoe. I just don’t like the color of the shoes she is wearing. I also am not a huge fan of the dress, either. Matchy-matchy green shoes would have reminded me too much of Prom '92…
Step 1: “What shoes do I already own that would look nice with this dress?” For a bright green dress, you’ll probably find that a simple pump or sandal in black, grey/silver or possibly even brown or taupe will work best for street wear. If you’re attending a red-carpet opening night when you’ll be the cynosure of all cameras, that’s a slightly different story.
If you’re going for an all-out “crazy fun” look, a vividly contrasting hot color as suggested by previous posters (e.g., orange, hot pink, fuchsia, etc.) could be good. Pick up the shoe color minimally in a piece of jewelry or other accessory, but don’t flaunt the match.
If Step 1 doesn’t solve the problem, move to Step 2: “What shoes would look nice with this dress and also with other things that I own?” Apply the same criteria as above.
Shoes are, after all, supposed to be in the nature of accessories that can be worn with more than one outfit. A pair of shoes that looks too obviously dedicated to a single outfit, and pretty much useless in any other context, is what gives the undesirable “prom dress/bridesmaid gown/chorus-girl costume” effect.
That’s why a very distinctive and unusual shoe color that is exactly the same as a color in the dress’s fabric or trim is often considered too “matchy-matchy”. It just screams “these are the shoes that I got specially for this outfit and I would have no idea what else to wear them with”. (Unless you’re Daerlyn, that is.)
And why is that a bad thing? What’s wrong with having your shoes look like you got them especially and exclusively for this particular dress, anyway? Well, now you’re delving into fashion metaphysics, but I would hazard the explanation that it has to do with the idea that true elegance involves an appearance of simplicity/versatility/virtuosity, rather than lots of obvious anxious effort. If it is too apparent that you carefully assembled every item of your outfit to coordinate perfectly together, that makes it look less dashing and more dull.
It’s rather like an over-decorated living room where all the furniture is in matching suites from the same manufacturer and no knickknacks or books are permitted that haven’t been approved by the interior designer to harmonize with the “look” of the room. You see lots of rooms like that in furniture and wallpaper catalogs, but if you ever actually walk into one in real life, you tend to think “bo-ring”. Where’s the originality, the creativity, the design flair that knows how to successfully put together different things that weren’t initially selected to go together, instead of just dutifully collecting an approved set of things that were selected only to go together?
Well, we’re probably seriously over-thinking the issue of how to pick a fucking pair of shoes here. But you asked about the thought processes involved in evaluating that choice, and that’s my best take on it.
In all fairness, I realised that all the clothes I was thinking of are fairly neutral - grey dress slacks, white pin-stripe blazer, top in which the predominant colour is a sort of chocolate . . . You’d have trouble finding shoes that don’t work with those items.
Yeah Daerlyn, but it still takes someone who knows what she’s doing to wear them with shiny purple pumps.
The problem with wearing shiny purple pumps with a green dress with exactly matching shiny purple trim is that it can be done (and generally is done) by somebody who doesn’t know what she’s doing. It’s the fashion equivalent of Paint By Numbers: no artistic vision or originality required.
I don’t really like the color combo of those shoes with that dress, anyway, regardless of whether they match the trim – the shoes are a muted dark color and the dress is an electric bright. The shoes would look great with a darker green dress, and the dress would look great* with a brighter shoe.
*I don’t like the dress either, but that’s neither here nor there.
Joan Rivers has recently suggested that to be in style you want to be wearing a whole bunch of different bright colors - she says you want to dress like Minnie Mouse. However in that picture I think Minnie is a little too spot-on with her matchy-matchy bow and shoes. Maybe the yellow shoes would have been better.
I personally feel like an idiot if my shoes don’t match at least some part of my outfit, preferably my pants or my skirt, but that’s why I’m not a fashionista.
I think it’s also important to keep in mind the rules are a bit different for things like work clothes. Nobody is going to complain about matching black heels to your black suit at a meeting. It’s hard to get snarky about black pumps or silver strappy sandals in pretty much any situation.
But if you are wearing electric crazy green shiny stuff…well, you better have a plan for that business. If you are going to make a bold style move (which a shiny electric green mini dress surely is) then you need to be prepared to back that shit up. You need to have a look that says “Yeah? So I’m wearing a dress that looks like a gum wrapper. What’s it to you? That’s what I thought!” Bolder accessories could have done that. Or more subtle accessories could have downplayed the dress a bit. But she hit the point where she’s saying “I know this is kind of ugly, so I’m going to try to neutralize it and bring it down to earth.”
I agree it just wasn’t a good dress for her to begin with. She looks uncomfortable, exposed and the colors do nothing for her coloring. Someone who can pull off a dress like that would probably have a naturally less subtle coloring- bottle blonde with blue eyes, or a very dark black woman, maybe. But peaches and cream redheads do better with softer colors that emphasize the subtlety and delicacy of their coloring.
)
