Forgotten Classics Make Way For "Trendy" Clothes

Image Source

What happened to all of the Classic Items? You know those basic essentials  that get a lot of use and tend to be flattering on most people? I have noticed a decrease in these items in department stores and chain stores and an increase in size-specific clothes made to suit a certain stereotype. The newer clothes normally aren't practical enough and become out-of-date quickly.

Whenever you pick up a good  style book the first words of advice tend to contain the words "must-haves" and "essentials". Items like trench-coats, LBDs and black flats are usually mentioned and in a way I guess I could agree that these items are still available to the general public, only, they have changed quite a bit. Trench coats that come in bright seasonal colours are featured in the pages of mail order catalogues, Little Black Dresses have become smaller (sometimes unflatteringly so) and black flats are definitely present (though there tends to be a small variety of practical choices available in larger sizes)...

I find the sizing problem to be a difficult one. As a Vintage Gal I like to be able to buy classy clothing that is modest and practical. This goes for all areas of my wardrobe including dresses, jackets, shoes and undergarments. Also being a thin tall girl, I find that if I am lucky enough to find what I want that it just happens to be out of my size range. Smaller sizes tend to fit into the trendy and revealing category. Instead of having a range of different work skirts that are available in different shapes as well as colours, there is one A-line option in a stretchy fabric and a complete range of tube skirts (way to short for most dress codes) to fit your needs. The humble collared shirt still exists, but the fabric is probably a bit clingier and see-through than it should be. The last time I had a look at button up shirts at the local department store the short-sleeve they had was verging on cap-sleeve length. 

It seems that the only time decent essential items are available is when those items are on-trend. They might also be available on online repro stores that are for Vintage gals, but in most cases you are up for a big shipping bill, or you are paying through the nose for an item, Or, the item is not available in a plain version anyway... You can most definitely buy sewing patterns for anything you want, but then you'll need to know how to sew it, or know someone who can sew it for you, And, you will need the right fabric...The most luck I have had shopping for Classic items is at the local Op-shop, but the range is quite limited. 

I think it would be nice if some department stores could get some more practical ranges in stock. A range of knee length and three quarter skirts; A-line and pencil skirts; grey, cream, khaki and black. A range of half slips and modest strapless bras in all sizes. A range of soft cotton button up blouses. Some practical patent or canvas shoes; oxfords, (low) evening heels and ballet flats. The most important thing would be to make these items available to as many sizes as possible. 

I think some of the unsightly outfits spotted on people in the cities could be due to the fact that many stores are set on following trends rather than selling clothes that are suited to the wearers needs. It could just be my up-bringing or how old-fashioned I am, but I think having some more practical, essential items in stores would be more beneficial to everyone. Wouldn't it be better if there were some clothes that weren't dictated to by age or size?

Maybe I'm alone on this one and maybe I'm dreaming. I don't want a vintage world, I would just like a few more conservative, practical and affordable choices in department stores. I think it would be stupid to let trends control the stores, making it harder for people to find clothes suited to their wants and needs.

What do you think?

Your Favourite Blogger,

Natalie

Jane Eyre Vs Wuthering Heights: The battle of two gothic tales

Two of the most iconic novels of the Victorian era were written by the Bronte sisters. When they were initially released "Jane Eyre" was the most popular amoungst the public and critics of that time period. Now, thanks to modern novels that appreciate the work of Emily Bronte "Wuthering Heights" appears to be the favourite. I have always liked "Jane Eyre" and decided to finally read "Wuthering Heights" in order to decide where the novels stand from my viewpoint.

Both books are considered to be of the gothic genre and having being written in the same household I could hardly imagine the tension and competitive nature that may have played a big part in the realtionships between the Bronte sisters. Also, a third and lesser-known sister, Anne Bronte had a novel released around the same time. I hardly think it's fair to compare sisters, but now having seen many articles of the sort and finding an opinion of my own on the subject I realise that another opinion is of little matter when there are so many circulating the blogosphere on the subject.

I read "Jane Eyre" first, which definitely makes me biased against the next novel reguardless of which is better.  "Jane Eyre" was so good that for something to beat it it would have to be much better, Monstrously so. Comparing "Jane Eyre" to other Victorian novels like "Oliver's Twist" and "Sense and Sensibility" I found the quality of the writing to be so much more advanced and the story-line to be new and individualistic. It was so unexpected because I had heard all these great things about other Victorian novels that this one seemed to be the wallflower of classic literature. Low expectations always seem to make for an interesting read.

The whole plot of "Jane Eyre" seemed so different and new to me even though it was an aged story. The beginning seemed a little predictable with the hard-done-by child and reminded me somewhat of "Oliver Twist" and musicals like "annie", but the rest of the novel saw a determined woman who saves herself and her beloved, much unlike many stories which require a "Prince charming" or "fairy godmother" to save the day. I really think this is where the book won my heart. That and the awkward characters which are so honestly alike normal human beings and unlike fake rehearsed ones seen in movies and in cheap romance novels.

The characters too were unique in the fact that they were not beautiful characters, but average and possibly even considered ugly by some. By creating characters like these Charlotte Bronte has shown that you don't need to be stereotypically beautiful to be loved and that everyone is beautiful in their own way. I think this is a great message to put in a novel because it makes readers feel more secure about themselves and because it is true.

"Jane Eyre" is a big favourite of mine and I rated it 5/5 on my shelfari page. I am always recommending this book to people and comparing other Victorian novels alongside. This book literally convinced me to try out some other books by this author and to take an interest in the author's life.

"Wuthering Heights" on the other hand was a bit of a disappointment. Now before you get all nasty about it hear me out. I know that I was biased and I had high expectations, but considering the great reviews that people were giving this book how could I not?

This novel showed a lot of potential and had some very promising ideas. The idea of telling a story through the eyes of a bystander was really cool. It made the novel seem like a really interesting Victorian gothic gossip session. And it was, minus the interesting aspect. I found that the novel dragged on through the entire duration and that there was no notification of a swapping of narrators when they changed mid-chapter.

The quality of the writing was nowhere near the standard of Jane Austen, let alone Charlotte Bronte. I felt that it was possibly too victorian and was a struggle to understand sometimes because of all the heavy words that I(the reader) was bogged down in. Also there were many instances where a housekeeper or servant would be speaking in an uneducated manner in the novel, where the writer had written it in that manner. It was very poorly done and took a while to decipher. This really made me lose interest in the book.

I thought the fact that Heathcliff was actually a gypsy child, was very very interesting and that the mannerisms of his household were very wild and eccentric. These things added to the gothic feel of the novel.

The story-line was very different to "Jane Eyre" in the aspect that Jane was the hero. "Jane Eyre" is almost considered a feminist novel compared with the barbaric and male-chauvinist characters in "Wuthering Heights".

Overall I gave "Wuthering Heights" 3/5 stars. I think the novel is really overrated. It was interesting and had some pretty quirky ideas, but compared to "Jane Eyre", "Wuthering Heights" just isn't worth the read.

Your Favourite Blogger,
Natalie