Log in

No account? Create an account
S'il vous plait, dessinez-moi SOMETHING BETTER THAN THIS. - Barnstorming on an Invisible Segway [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
Marissa Lingen

[ website | My Website ]
[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

S'il vous plait, dessinez-moi SOMETHING BETTER THAN THIS. [Aug. 7th, 2010|08:39 am]
Marissa Lingen
I get a shopping icon, and the Strib has to inspire me. Of course.

Someone supposedly wrote into the Strib this week to ask, "What on earth are carrot pants?" (I doubt this. I highly doubt that anybody is going around knowing that such a thing exists but not what. This is a ringer. But never mind, let us continue.) And in their explanation, the Strib said that the said carrot pants have tapered ankles but "use pleats to create volume through the hips."


Let's have a show of hands among female-identified persons over the age of, say, 14: who among us feels the need to use pleats to create volume through the hips? My ass is a size 4. 4. As in 4-pity's-sake even the insane American fashion industry cannot convince me that this is an overly large size. You know. That 4. And yet. Do I need pleats to create volume through the hips? I'm thinking no. I'm thinking not so much. How to tell my hips from pageant hair: they do not need volumizer. The end.

These are the pants for people who really, truly woke up one morning and said, "my top half is all right, but my lower half looks insufficiently like a root vegetable." But carrot, carrot seems like a misnomer to me, given how tall most of us aren't. I'm thinking turnip. I'm thinking rutabaga. And at that point, I beg--nay, I demand--that the fashion industry gives me what I truly need in trousers. Which is to say, the celeriac pants. The only pants in the world that look exactly like the baobab planet from Le Petit Prince. Hard to wash. Hard to iron. Hard to walk in. Yet awesome. With all the tendrils and the reconnection of the fabric to itself and possibly root charms hanging off. Come on! Celeriac pants! The natural next step in fashion evolution!

Seriously, people talk about looking at their old photos and thinking, "Did we ever think that looked good?" And I have this gift: I do that in real-time. Most of the stuff people wear most of the time looks fine to me at the time, and it looks fine to me in old photos. Yes, women's T-shirts were cut shorter in '01 than they are this year. They looked fine then, they look fine now, as long as you're not taking them to ridiculous extremes. When you are taking them to ridiculous extremes, they looked bad then, they look bad now. Or they look ridiculous but somehow work on you. Those are the options. When people from my high school post old photos on Facebook and write, "OMG can you believe we thought that looked good?", I either think, "Calm down, dude; deep breaths," or I think, "Who 'we,' kemosabe? Because, y'know. If you'd asked."

Carrot pants are not on the list of things you are destined to love later. Hold out for the celeriac pants. Or possibly the box to hold the sheep.

[User Picture]From: redbird
2010-08-07 04:18 pm (UTC)
Don't I have enough problems finding pants that fit before they clutter shelves and storerooms with things that look good on nobody?

I can accept that lots of people (adults of any gender) have longer inseams than I do; I wish the fashion industry could accept that if they are selling me things to be worn off the rack, they need to allow for women with short legs. (I am one inch shorter than the average for American women; my inseam is shorter than that on many "petite" pants, and three inches shorter than the usual "average" women's pants.)

I can accept that lots of people want pants whose waistline is below the natural waist; I prefer things that don't feel like they're trying to fall off, but many people don't seem to have that reaction.

But a description like that makes me want to check that the paper wasn't dated April 1.

(I need an icon for "the clothing industry clearly wants me to wear nothing but sunscreen.")
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: dichroic
2010-08-07 07:24 pm (UTC)
I can explain low waistlines, though not ultra-low ones. Those of us who are short-waisted, without much room between the bottom of the ribcage and the top of the hipbones, tend not to indent much at the waist because there's just no room to. Therefor it's considerably more comfortable to wear something that's cut to sit at the hipbones, because we can breathe. Things that are cut to sit at the waist tend to assume said waist is somewhere in the middle of my ribs, and thus if they fit in the hips I can barely fasten the top. (I suspect a lot of things that hit me a little below the navel are cut with the expectation that they'll sit on my hipbones. But at least that makes them about the right diameter, and so they are comfortable.) I can see how they wouldn't work well for women with a long rise and a small waist/hip ratio, but they do work for some of us.

For carrot pants, however, I have no justification.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
From: writingortyping
2010-08-07 11:58 pm (UTC)
As a short-waisted person, let me just say "yes, yes, yes, and more yes, please, thank you very much" to this.

The 80's were not kind to me. My floating ribs were pretty much corseted by anything available for sale at that time.

But carrot pants - agreed. No. Just no.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: auriaephiala
2010-08-08 02:06 am (UTC)
Not ALL short-waisted people are built alike. I am very short-waisted and cannot wear trousers that end on the hips instead of the waist. They fall off my hips, and look ridiculous on me and are incredibly uncomfortable. YMMV.

It's been very difficult for the last five years to find a pair of trousers that simply fit.

But I agree carrot-pants would suit almost no one.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: mrissa
2010-08-07 09:52 pm (UTC)
Yes, they don't seem to recognize the difference between "that would only look good on a fashion model" and "the fashion model would still be attractive to those people who find fashion models attractive, but the pants would still look hideous." Which latter category is much, much larger than they think.

Which latter category, though, prompts me to remind the internet at large of the very useful response when shopping with fragile friends, sweethearts, family members, etc.:
"How do I look?"
"You, as always, look great. Those pants, not so good. But you? Great."
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: aedifica
2010-08-07 11:06 pm (UTC)
That is an excellent response, and I'm going to try to remember it in case I ever go shopping with my most-traditionally-girly friend.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
(Deleted comment)
[User Picture]From: mrissa
2010-08-08 12:53 pm (UTC)
This is good, unless Z's standards for what looks bloody awful and yours don't overlap significantly, or unless how they overlap is unknown. But by now I expect you have a good data set on his aesthetics.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)