I am sorry that I can not remember who started the discussion about the clothing from Talbots but last night Michelle Obama wore a beautiful white dress to an event in the East Room and it was from this store. It sells for less than $200 and looked amazing on her. The November issue of O magazine also features a gorgeous pair of high heels from Talbots. You might want to check out what they have to offer.

I also just saw that picture of Mrs. Obama in the Talbot's dress. I thought she looked wonderful. I got a Talbot's catalog, and I liked several things in it. I haven't ordered, though, partly because of what was discussed here. However, I think a lot of it has to do with personality. Some of us on the forum are more daring than others. I'm a little on the traditional side, and that is where Talbot's fits in. Unfortunately, I'm not made for the lovely sheath dresses that our first lady prefers!

I don't think it's Michelle's best look.
First Lady

I'm happy when things are updated. JC made a big comeback from Tees&more Tees. All catalogs deserve a fresh look now and then. Just be careful. There's a fine line between Traditional and OL; just as there's one between Up-to-Date and Over-the-Edge.
Good Luck!

Talbots, Chico's, and Coldwater Creek have all professed to be traveling in a different direction this fall. It appears that their sales figures have demanded a change. I have several tops from Coldwater Creek that are available in similar style and fit from Dillards, Bloomingdales, etc. I agree with TN Girl that we all have differing opinions about what we want to look like and there is room for all of us to dress as we please. There are lots of ways to do "fitted" and "flattering", which are what S&C insist upon. There are lots of things at Banana Republic and J.Crew that I can't or won't wear but that doesn't mean the stores should be scratched from anyone's list of choices.

Pres and I were posting at the same time. If that is not Ms. Obama's best look, that is not to be blamed on Talbot's. They didn't make her wear it. And the same dress is available at lots of retailers. IMO, it's a same-ol'-same-ol'. (Is that how you write that?)

Voguette, I started a Talbot's thread recently, which may be the one you're referring to. I had ordered 2 blouses and 3 cardigans, and was disappointed in the cardis. They have been returned, but I kept the blouses (both lovely!) and I'm really enjoying them. Anyway, I hope no one will be put off Talbots because of my experience. I will certainly continue to shop there.

Now, on to CWC...and I hope this won't incite a heated discussion . This fall I have purchased a black ponte knit vest, a paisley blouse, a tweed jacket and a bronze jean jacket from CWC. ALL are VERY fitted and very flattering. Yes, CWC has some unfitted, boxy styles and some styles with an "older" look. So do many other retailers who are trying to appeal to a broad spectrum of shoppers.

As others of you have said, we all have different fashion personalities, and I'm not advocating that we all wear Talbots and CWC. But for the most part their styles work for MY style. I find (most of) their clothing classic and classy. And I don't think I'm giving off an "OL Vibe". On various occasions recently people who don't know my age have assumed that I'm in my forties...I'm 58.

as we were shopping for my mom last weekend, we went into jcrew, banana, talbots, ann taylor. The quality are very comparable, all have expensive fabric like silk/wool.

Jcrew had the most feminine pieces and most fashion forward (sometimes a bit out there). Talbots is the most conservative. Most of their stuff are not boxy. I don't think they give out OL vibe, many are classic, so really depending on how you style them. We almost bought a coat there except they ran out of the size we wanted. Ann Taylor had some gorgeous necklaces, I;d even say surpass jcrew!

There is nothing "Old Lady" about Mrs. Obama and the photograph I saw of her was more flattering than the one posted here. She is "classic and classy" IMO.
I wear a very small size and can not shop in a lot of stores so I do not have first hand experience with many of the retailers mentioned but I agree with the posters who think that an appropriate fit and enhancing ones own style trumps being trendy.

I got a pair of slingback, peeptoe espadrilles in the spring that I wore a lot this summer. Also a pair of pants in a small size that fit without alterations.(yay!) The quality of both items seems to be good. I would order from Talbots again if a piece appealed to me and the price was right.

quote:

I do not have first hand experience with many of the retailers mentioned but I agree with the posters who think that an appropriate fit and enhancing ones own style trumps being trendy .

It's interesting that you feel comfortable posting that, while I tremble to post: Based on the experience of following fashion in a major center for my entire life, I would agree that fresh style trumps getting stuck in past designs.

Now, remember that I always say: Ignore all labels, whether designer, price, fabric, or store. Educate your eye by following fashion sites, magazines, and catalogs, and resist the urge to hold on to the past. There's a reason that S&C have a big trash can on the set. You certainly will require "appropriate fit" and your "own style." But that's not enough. You have to recognize what's beautiful and current.

I don't think regional differences, in the Internet Age, are that important, either. I have fashion buddies in Winnipeg, Oregon, Atlanta, Maryland, Vancouver, Arizona and Mexico. They are all gorgeously dressed, and up-to-date, too. It's not necessary to go shockingly overboard to have a fresh look. It takes skills that we can all learn, and respect for an art form that we can enjoy.

It's a matter of embracing change, and, accepting Style for what it is: A Moving Target.

quote:

Originally posted by gobaygo:
Talbots, Chico's, and Coldwater Creek have all professed to be traveling in a different direction this fall. It appears that their sales figures have demanded a change.

Did you read this somewhere online? I'd like to see the article if so. I just took a look at all their websites and so far I don't see that much of a change. I have been waiting for these three stores to update their styles a bit.

Miss Fit, I got catalogs from all three which described the new updated attitude to which they hoped to aspire. Whether or not they have done it is obviously a matter of opinion. I have not been in a CWC store, but they do have the word "fitted" in many of their catalog descriptions now. Chicos mostly bragged about their new pants fit - which I like but had to return because the regular length was too short. (I have several pair of their old Modern fit pants which they no longer sell and really liked them) They did have a number of fitted pieces in the store but also a lot of the old ones which required wearing a clothespin in the back like their displays. Their catalogs show beautiful outfits which appear to be fitted and flattering to the models - but they are models. I have not been in a Talbots, either, but was repeating what was said in their catalog. In addition to all this, the Ann Taylor catalog said they were tired of being stuffy and had changed their focus to more youthful and more fun clothing. Again, I don't know if they did this or not. I don't like to pay that much for clothes because I get tired of them too quickly. No, I did not read an article - I was repeating what the retailers themselves professed to be their new plan.

My post seems to have disappeared into an unreliable airport wireless internet connectiion. I'll just summarize:

I believe all of these retailers will remain at the more traditional/less fashionable end of the spectrum. As a long time Talbots customer, I do note a change. Will it be enough to keep current customers while appealing to a younger, more stylish customer? Only time will tell. Also, not everyone considers a "fresh, current" look a priority. Those of us of a certain age in male dominated fields remember a warning in John Molloy's first book on this very subject. His comment at the time was Montreal is six months ahead of New York and New York is a year or more ahead of the heartland. Is this as true today with the internet? I suspect some are afraid to find out. I like to update my look, but I will never be cutting edge. (No, I'm not still wearing my '90s suits)

Thank you for responding. I haven't looked in these stores lately either so I don't know how much of a change it really is. I guess what I'm saying is that it is still not enough of a change for me. I guess we all can't love every chain store.

"I like to update my look, but I will never be cutting edge."

Going too far fashion forward is hardly the problem in our conversations here, LOL. I can't remember a poster who needed to hear: Whoa! Get a Suit! You are Too Cutting Edge! Most folks who need a suit (for an interview; or a new position) have nothing but sub-casual wear in their wardrobes. And all clothes isn't work clothes, either, as Ili always reminds us.

The undertone of this conversation, and many of the others, still includes searching for approval to hang on to past styles.

"...you then tell people to "throw out" their Talbot's catalogs."

I believe that was advice for LC, who is under 30 (or looks it); is just learning Style, and who should not be struggling to update old looks that she doesn't even own yet. She can start fresh.

Although I think Talb's could have some wearable clothes (Michelle O's dress is nice; not perfect) I don't think it's a good place to go for educating your eye. If you find a great piece there, fine, ignore the label and wear.

But there are many other places to learn what to choose, and what to reject (JC&LuckyMag) and many that have a terrific mainstream vibe without looking backward (AT); places that actually teach styling (WHBM) and places that teach the Art of Style (NM& Elle Mag Runway shows.)

Are you open to it? Or are you stuck?

On edit: It took me so long to post this - that lots of people responded in between and it looks like I'm talking to pres - but I'm talking to Miss-Fit:

Instead of asking - why not look at a catalog yourself. I'm NOT good about ignoring labels. So I've always been biased against Talbots. But then Last Caress posted a few things in a thread Wendy started a few weeks ago and I was shocked - because she's so hip and I think of Talbots as so frumpy. So I had to look - and the things she posted were adorable. As has been said, whether or not the goal of updating has been achieved is a matter of opinion, but you can't determine what your opinion is unless you look.

There's still some of what you think when you hear Talbots.

But there's also stuff that looks pretty much like the things people post from J Crew all the time.

Pres, you are right about the vibe of the stores we are talking about. They are not the place to learn what is new. They are, however, to me, safe places to look around without the danger of teeny-bopper lurking everywhere (Lucky mag). I don't have much success at Banana because everything looks too corporate and, frankly, kind of stuffy. I don't care for J.Crew and rarely find anything at the Loft because everything is too long, lean, and sleeveless (I don't do sleeveless). I don't like items that might look too cheap, but don't like to pay regular AT prices either. I wish there were a store where the styles were updated, age appropriate, and a little different. I don't like to grab every trend and wear the whole thing. I wish there were a Cabi store. I doubt if they do parties where I live but I wouldn't care for buying clothes at a party anyway. I don't ever have a lot of time to just look around and don't live where I can shop a little every day. I look mostly on the internet. All these problem sort of take the fun out of dressing.

Something I don't believe anyone here has addressed is how a garment looks ON your particular body type. I'm sure we've all had the experience of what looks great/horrid on the page or the hanger, looks horrid/great once we put it on.

If items from one of the Catalogs That Must Never Be Named flatter someone, IMHO that is the first impression made.

If you look at the Talbots catalog - the pic that pres posted is the one Talbots actually chose to show off the dress. I agree - that picture is not great. It looked much better in the Times.

Talbots is not for everyone. Their design is more classic, and SIMPLE, not too much embellishments and ruffles or the big flowy tunics and the the trendy stuff. So as a whole store, they may seem boring and old. Just if you wear all classic cuts from other trendy stores, you will still look a bit old fashioned if you don't pile on some trendy accessories (not talking about updated classic looks). One thing about Talbots is that majority of their tops are no longer that boxy (as I was just in store last weekend).

I wouldn't advise trendy people (or trendy wannabes) to shop their entire wardrobe there. For the more conservative crowd, it is a nice place. You can buy classic and simple designed with quality material, and style with up-to-date accessories. Keep in mind it is the whole outfit that matters.

i've heard Pres say time and time again 'ignore all labels, sizes', etc. why there's trouble with understanding the concept i don't understand, it sure gets mis-printed and misquoted. if something looks good, then you wear it~that's not to say certain stores don't have certain demographics/styles they're trying to entice. chicos, coldcreek, jjill and talbots are supposed to be for me. (they're not). i can't wear floaty, boxy or pastels. i don't like polyester. i don't like dainty jewelry. i think wearing clothes 'other people think you should because of your age'
itself is aging. i don't want to look 20, i don't want to look old, i don't want you to know how old i am by how i dress.

LC is young and vibrant and she likes an edgier look. it's ok for Pres to say 'throw out the talbots catalog' and direct her to other stores that may get her style/sense/vibe and forgo stores whose demographic are at least double her age. the post was about Her, right?
my quibble is when descriptions like 'edgy' or 'traditional' are taken out of context, people who get upset about how others perceive them have no trouble with their own misperceptions.
what i consider edgy means Ombre tights to someone else. wearing a jacket in a good fabric that doesn't have to be pinned for photoshoots is not being edgy. it's also not traditional.
there's a spanish saying loosely translated: 'love may be blind, but your neighbor is not'. same can be said about clothes and fashion, but like it was said, there's a reason there's a big garbage can as part of every makeover show.
there are women who show up wearing and defending their awful rags or bad hair, whose reason for being there is 'to show the experts' how wrong they are. (arizona yoga sisters come to mind, so does the 70s retro woman). if you giggled, grunted or rolled your eyes at them then you know everything's relative as far as 'having your own style' and someone could be doing it to you. and me.
nothing ages like not moving forward and sticking to rules given you when you were a kid. life goes on, technology changes, things change. fashion is no exception.

I hope this is a discussion, and not an arguement, because I don't have a point to prove. I am just trying to learn something.

Pres, I doubt if many people can afford (more time than money) to get that nitpicking about differences. The collar of the CWC is wider and that's why it is not standing up. The narrower standing-up collar is less cooperative with statement necklaces or scarves worn under it. Is that a matter of trend, style, or preference? And about "pebblier", I associate pebblier with younger, yes, because pebblier is more unironed and unkempt looking - not the crisp white shirt people post about. As a matter of note, I have a Chicos beautifully fitted white shirt that is so pebbly, even after spraying and steam ironing, that I rarely wear it, because it looks unkempt. I tried on the "perfect shirt" at JC and did like the fit, but it was not ironed and I feared that was because it would not iron and look crisp, ever. To me, unkempt is a young look and I have outgrown it except for the beach, etc.

I agree that fashions change, but the only changes I am interested in are shapes (jackets, pants legs, shoulders, skirts, lapels, sleeves), lengths (pants, skirts. sleeves), widths (pants legs, sleeves, shoulders) and size (handbags, jewelry),etc. I am not interested in trendy and try to avoid too much of it because I don't want to look like one of those things jumping off the cliff. I don't like the word "mature" to describe what I like because that sounds like OL, but "grown-up" seems better - that is avoiding anything too short, too low, revealing for no reason like keyhole anything, tight, sloppy and unkempt. I would like to find a "grown-up" place to watch the way fashion is changing, not have to try to figure it out from the likes of Lucky magazine which has almost nothing I would wear.

I know this is only one look, but if this is what Lucky magazine is training my eye for, no thanks!

http://www.luckymag.com/style/...blazers_skinny_pants

Damn! You mean that I bought this ruffled shirt and because it's from Talbots it is not fresh?!? **sob** Luckily, it looks smashing with my jackets, so I'll soldier on.......

http://www1.talbots.com/online...Sale=#contentwrapper

You would have gasped at leopard print three years ago, too (many here did.) Now it functions as a neutral pattern. And Glads were shouted down, also. Not to mention bare legs (in the summer!)

If you look at the new things, you are likely to find them, well, new. But it trains your eye to accept new things, when they become mainstream, instead of searching around for past cuts of clothes, and getting stuck in WNTW. Aren't you able to tell which outfits are for your body shape? Then you have nothing to fear from browsing Lucky. You may pick up an updated classic look: Same Page

Even classics change; the lapel, the length of the skirt, and yes, the width of the collar. Colors change. Toes and heels change.

It's all about Change.

and what exactly Is so great about change? well, for starters it tells the world that you are vibrant, current, with it, you have a sharp mind. if you're current about clothes people assume you're also current about other issues in life: politics, world affairs, computer skills, YOUR JOB~ how not to get a job after 10 years: show up at the interview wearing the clothes you wore to your last job, and that's why it matters, it's not about who has what, or who paid this for what, it's an outward sign that you have a curiosity about life, are interested in people, in the world around you, in change ~and very importantly: change doesn't scare you. fear of change is a sign of getting older/feeble, of refusing to accept the younger generation, etc. if this is not YOU< don't send out that vibe. clothes say much more than we think, it's more than not wearing sweats or pajamas or dirty/worn out stuff.

Pres and Illibaby, I seem to be the only one in this conversation with you and I don't need to be talked into accepting change - I am the one who doesn't like to buy expensive clothes because I want to feel free to get rid of them when I get tired of them. Before I buy anything, I thoughtfully concentrate on whether I already have something so similar to the item I'm considering so I can avoid duplication. I like to move on but not at the speed of Pres in NYC.

I am just trying to understand how to keep up with the big changes because I don't have the time or money to keep up with all the details that change. In the Lucky outfit Pres posted, the description says pointy toe pumps. Is that just to go with that one "French-elegant" outfit or are they now back already? If they are now back and the oval ones are out, that is too much change too fast for my time or money budget to keep up. But I love change and really enjoy wearing something I've never worn before, so you don't need to convince me. Without what I've read on this board I would never have worn, at my age, a knee-length skirt with knee-high boots last year - but I loved doing it. Please tell me I can wear them again if it ever gets cool enough this year - or has that changed already?

I was commenting that I didn't see much of a change based on having looked at the Talbot's website, so yes I did look, I just haven't looked in the store. I guess I'm looking for more of a change than just stuff like the red shirt. It may look like a new direction to some people but to me it's not that different than what I've seen from them in the past. Their clothes still look very traditional and older to me. Now they have a few more things that look like J Crew and Ann Taylor (which doesn't excite me, ho-hum, same old-same old). Sorry I can't be more excited!

quote:

Originally posted by liphysicist:
On edit: It took me so long to post this - that lots of people responded in between and it looks like I'm talking to pres - but I'm talking to Miss-Fit:

Instead of asking - why not look at a catalog yourself. I'm NOT good about ignoring labels. So I've always been biased against Talbots. But then Last Caress posted a few things in a thread Wendy started a few weeks ago and I was shocked - because she's so hip and I think of Talbots as so frumpy. So I had to look - and the things she posted were adorable. As has been said, whether or not the goal of updating has been achieved is a matter of opinion, but you can't determine what your opinion is unless you look.

There's still some of what you think when you hear Talbots.

But there's also stuff that looks pretty much like the things people post from J Crew all the time.

Gobaygo,
That's a fair question.
The way that I handle this is wardrobe management.
For this Fall, I have added one, just one, pair of new shoes, some new tights (inexpensive update); one new pencil (longer) and I have had some pencil skirts altered (narrowed.) I already had the h*t tops (ruffled) b/c I bought them last season from a fashion-forward place.

I still wear most of the stuff from my wardrobe, but the tights, shoes, and a new necklace will change the whole thing. For Winter, one pair of
very h*t Moto boots (I usually destroy boots in one season) and one fancy dress for holiday wear; I'll mix up my evening separates, too.

The most important part was donating the stuff
from the back end: some cardis with loose fit and passed colors; a Chanel type sweater, "classic" color and cut, that now looks too long and heavy. The current clothes are "skimpier."

About the toes; note that the points are above a platform. That's a new pointy look. Shoes are h*t for their current season; may be stretched another year, and then, most of them will begin to fail.

The boots/skirt outfit sounds perfect. I'm glad that you tried the combo.

GBG & Pres you both bring up a good point that reminds me of another point: the shopping habits of each person can't be categorized neatly into One. there are women (i've seen the shows, like 'clean house') who have a need to fill their closets with stuff~ whether it's good, flattering or indifferent doesn't matter, they want stuff. other people prefer the more expensive but less approach, while yet a third wants a closet that is manageable and each season has what is called a 'capsule' in a mid-range price. we're not all with the same need. i tell you what has been working for me: buying just a few things each season that modernize what i have and when you like clothes (and i do, what's wrong with that? lol) knowing when they're dragging the rest of the outfit down and doing something about it. (square toe made material short manly boots, bulky knits of any kind, pants that are too short). IMO there is a 3 year grace period on clothes, 5 at the most without realizing hey, the new silhouette is diff, but we can't wear a head to toe outfit with older pieces and expect to look current. this is my opinion. can things last longer than that? yes. do you want them to? depending on what it is and how much you paid i guess. i have pants that age that are low rise and therefore nonwearable for me and blouses that have a wider silhouette or seaming that dates it to a certain year/era.

the reason why looking at magazines works/helps is that you can learn what to do with pieces that aren't exactly fresh (let's take those gray pants, shall we?) and wear them with pieces that modernize them so they can be worn in an oufit: moto boots, a tunic-like top or same color boots with a buttonfront and moto jacket. when you know what's going on with silhouettes and proportions you are more able to discern and put together pieces that when taken together can salvage items that aren't really fresh. one thing is true (and btw goybaygo, i think you should pat yourself on the back Twice because you saw the ourfit and you could tell it wasn't current).

shoes are important. i just read an article that talked about how much they can update an outfit (so do accesories in general) but most importantly how many people with foot problems are wearing old shoes. don't keep shoes past their date. forget how they look it that doesn't matter, think about your foot health.

Now, I am just being curious, since, with my feet, I have to wear what doesn't make them scream. But, if you only bought one new pair this fall, and only two new pair of boots for winter, and shoes only work for two years, does that mean that next year you will need to buy all new shoes, except for the three pair purchased this year?

quote:

Originally posted by Miss_Fit:
I was commenting that I didn't see much of a change based on having looked at the Talbot's website, so yes I did look, I just haven't looked in the store. I guess I'm looking for more of a change than just stuff like the red shirt. It may look like a new direction to some people but to me it's not that different than what I've seen from them in the past. Their clothes still look very traditional and older to me. Now they have a few more things that look like J Crew and Ann Taylor (which doesn't excite me, ho-hum, same old-same old). Sorry I can't be more excited!

Why are you using an exclamation point here? Did I say something rude to you? You don't have to apologize about what you are or are not excited about or whether or not you want to wrap yourself in a Talbot's catalog. I'm not the hugest Talbot's fan myself - but it's different from what it used to be. But I don't see the call for cyber-yelling at me over this.

I'd like to offer some middle ground here. Everyone on this thread and board has been kind and constructive towards me. I hate to see an argument break out.

From my point of view, we are all looking for the same thing: clothes that make us feel and look good, clothes that are also within our budgets.

This is an outfit that I wore this spring and summer (2009).
DISCLAIMER: Not everyone will like it. It is NOT meant to be an example of what to wear. Everyone has their own style.
http://www.mycloset.com/my_clo...outfit/?oid=2896&e=s

Pants, shirt, belt: from Talbots Outlet (with Talbots retail tags), at ridiculously low clearance prices.


However, I would never have been able to put this together had I not been INSPIRED BY ALL OF YOU, and had I not educated myself on current style, fit and proportion. (G*d, I sound conceited--thankfully, those who know me know that I'm not.)

My more recent experiment with a Talbots catalog was much less fun. (I gave away the catalog, Pres.)

On this board, I have met some of the most intelligent, insightful and supportive people I've ever had the pleasure of speaking with.

The last thing I want is animosity among friends who all seem to be working towards the same goal--looking and feeling our best.



P.S. Thank you for the compliments. I was actually stunned to the point that I needed a few drinks. In a good way. Then stunned in a bad way by the arguing. So if I said anything offensive, then please chalk it up to the whiskey. (ili, can I borrow a cup of vodka? I'm all out of Maker's Mark. )

I feel fortunate to be part of a group of strong, willful women. Let our opinions clash, but not our wills (nor our clothes).

Wow. Interesting thread.

I love the way a lot of Talbots clothing looks on the hanger, in the catalog and even on other people I see wearing it. I think they have come along way recently. They use really lovely fabrics and most of the garments I have tried recently have impressed me with their tailoring and pretty details.

Unfortuately, talbots doesn't work that well for me overall. While some of their items may look like JC, or some of the other retailers on the hanger, they do not fit my body the way items from the others do.

For example, I purchased a ruffled Frances shirt from JC months back. I am slender with a small bust, very small waist and proportionally curvy hips and bum. The JC shirt hits at just the right length for me to tuck in to a pencil skirt neatly or wear out with jeans. It nips in just right at my waist without pulling at the hips. The sleeves are narrow and the shoulder fit is great. Talbots had a white shirt that was just as up to date (and on the hanger was prettier IMO). I tried it in the smallest size they carry in store. Since it didn't fit, I ordered it in both a 0 and a 2. They were both still too boxy and oversized.

The fact that Talbots will not carry anything smaller than a 4 in store or even make sweaters small enough for me to wear hits me wrong. I guess I don't understand why they have a wide variety of petites and women avaiable in store, but nothing available for those of us who wear a regular 0 to 2. Honestly, unless they decide to make xs in sweaters, or to make some more tailored blouses, it won't matter to me how fashion forward they try to be. I will still be shopping other places.

quote:

i think wearing clothes 'other people think you should because of your age'
itself is aging.

Well said!
I have had a dread of "making a fool of myself," trying to wear things that are "too young" for me" at 45, and I was sometimes overcompensating and ending up with pieces that were actually too elderly for me.
With the help of people on this forum, I'm trying to learn the difference between "classy" and "dumpy."