"Do You Prefer Fashion Victim, or Ensembly Challenged?"

Jan 08, 2008 @ 3:55pm

Let it be said from the start, with the exception of Project Runway, we practically loathe reality TV. But every once in a while we do indulge in What Not To Wear. What can we say? We live for makeovers.

We're just not totally convinced that, much like ANTM, anything actually changes after the show.

The episodes usually go: Stacey and Clinton, the hosts of What Not To Wear, barge into someone's bedroom and throw away everything they own. They announce rules about what they can buy, and send them around Manhattan to sulk over the impossible task of suddenly acquiring style.

The advice? Stacey demands the fashion victims buy color and bold prints, damning every neutral garment in sight. Meanwhile, most people on the show need a new professional look - which might demand neutrality.

You never get the sense that any of the trite advice resonates with the "victims" anyway. Without Tim Gunn standing beside the closet every morning, you know they'll return to baggy clothes and brassy hair, except now they might be recognized as a "fashion victim" from a reality show.

The newer versions, How Do I Look? and Tim Gunn's Guide to Style, aren't much better. In fact, none of the shows, including What Not to Wear, seem to have much success at all - so why do they keep producing new ones?

posted by FWD

Jan 08, 2008 4:20PM

They let viewers make fun of people's clothes, but feel like they're being helpful while they're doing it?

posted by mpw

Jan 08, 2008 4:35PM

I do feel like some of the people stick with their new style. Most them seem to have pretty low self esteem, so, once they feel pretty and stylish for the first times in their lives, they want to keep feeling that way. I think this especially holds true for the moms who felt guilty about paying any attention at all to their appearance but then realized that dressing well didn't mean they were bad mothers.

But, yeah, for the most part, networks keep producing these shows because it's fun to make fun of these people.

posted by staceyy

Jan 08, 2008 4:52PM

The best part of this post is the title!
Clueless, oh how I love you.

But I definately have to agree.
In my opinion, a fashion sense cannot be made. You either have it, or you don't..

posted by guest

Jan 08, 2008 4:53PM

Actually What Not To Wear has done shows where they revisit people who have been on the show and see if they've changed or not...

I think these shows provide a purpose. Honestly I'd rather watch a WNTW/Tim Gunn Guide to style marathon then say Real World.

Also I think for Middle America, it is the advice of getting rid of those lame high school shirts and sweats and picking up quality, classic pieces that is appealing.

posted by flizzers

Jan 08, 2008 5:06PM

I've seen some of the What Not to Wear update shows, and despite a few "relapses", it appears that the fashion victims have stuck with the rules bestowed upon them. I like watching the show because it amazes me that people are STILL throwing themselves in ill-fitting jogging suits and schoolgirl pleated skirts owned by their teenaged daughters, and think it's perfectly normal. Who doesn't like a good makeover??!!

posted by Ali

Jan 08, 2008 5:26PM

Random, but I must say, I love all the Clueless allusions throughout the blog. It's my favorite movie. Ever.

posted by lentil

Jan 08, 2008 5:30PM

I wonder if women just need a jolt every once in a while to knock themselves out of bad/bland fashion-land? And maybe many (or most) women aren't surrounded enough with the sort of aspirational imagery and ideas needed to jumpstart their fashion sense. And that possibly things start to go down hill at an accelerated rate after years of wearing the same uniform/war paint/hairdo...

I know that I'm surrounded by new images everyday as part of my profession and every once in a while there is something that will catch my eye--be it a photograph, typeface or pattern--that will make me look at things differently. I call those moments "next level shit".

And maybe not all women are lucky enough to have a lot of true inspiration around them so they need shows like this to help them out of their funk?

posted by Cassette Love

Jan 08, 2008 5:34PM

"The advice? Stacey demands the fashion victims buy color and bold prints, damning every neutral garment in sight. Meanwhile, most people on the show need a new professional look - which might demand neutrality."

While I greatly dislike the conformity of outfits suggested to the people on WNTW (seriously- cami, jacket, dark wash jeans?) the idea that they dis neutrals is completely untrue. I think you would be hardpressed to find an episode of it in which they *didn't*.

posted by Miss Elle

Jan 08, 2008 5:51PM

I used to be obsessed with What Not to Wear. Stacey and Clinton were my idols. I still have insane respect for them, particularly Stacey, but don't know how I feel about the show anymore. Stacey's got a journalism degree from Vassar, which is absolutely respectable, but I don't necessarily agree with pushing all of their "clients" into the same "jean, cute skirt, jacket, flats/pointy-toe shoes" mold.

Tim Gunn's Guide to Style is much better, in my opinion. I like that they send their "clients" to a life coach, introduce them to "celebrities" who can relate to their insecurities and get them over it, and they don't toss all their clothes - just the ones that are of poor quality or incorrect fit.

Finola's "How Do I Look" show is a pile of crap. That's how I feel about that. =)

xoxo!

posted by guest

Jan 08, 2008 5:58PM

OMG I LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOVEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE CLINTON.

does anyone have his email or anything? is he on myspace/facebook/manhunt/something?

posted by beccaeve

Jan 08, 2008 6:32PM

Because we keep watching them.

It's also fun think about how we'd spend $5,000 dollars if let loose in NYC with our very own free credit card.

Plus, who can resist a makeover?

http://fashionmefabulous.blogspot.com

posted by Francisca

Jan 08, 2008 7:09PM

I agree that most of the advice they give are not enough or what people really need, but I also think that style and good taste can grow in people. Its a matter of education and its a matter of those people accepting the help or really wanting the change to happen. People forget that most of the style Icons mags and designers choose as their muses are created, just a few have the genuine good taste. They have learn with the fashion industry and so could this people learn if the persons who are giving advice are willing to actually change something.

posted by guest

Jan 08, 2008 9:15PM

The show doesn't really have control over what the person will do with the advice after they give it (just like any situation in which advice is given to someone, like a friend).

I've seen many episodes teaching the "victim" how to dress appropriately for work - who cares if neutral colors aren't emphasized, some of these ppl were showing up in horrid outfits to their office, and they are now looking great!

I think the "neutral colors" comment was exaggerated... need to take each episode with context.

posted by TyTy

Jan 08, 2008 11:01PM

I don't know why you think everyone would relapse...the style advice given by Stacy and Clinton is never revolutionary and doesn't require much effort for the upkeep - wear clothes that fit you properly, don't wear clothes inapropriate for your age, and try new colors. It's a very easy formula to adapt to. You can also pretty much tell thoughout the course of an episode if the person will make change or not.

posted by linman

Jan 08, 2008 11:17PM

Because... you said it yourself, we LOVE makeovers! The producers could care less if the fashionless become fashionforward- as long as people watch, they film.

posted by guest

Jan 08, 2008 11:42PM

What Not to Wear doesn't attempt to make unstylish people stylish, which is exactly why they stick to a few formulas. The befores look awful: frumpy or trashy or sloppy, and the afters look nice, somewhat current, and with flattered figures. The show does a great job, and precisely because they don't push people too far, it's not absurd to think people stick with it.

I recently saw an episode where they trashed a guy's crazy colorful loud printed silky shirts, yet Clinton was wearing a shirt that could be described with the same adjectives in one of the segments. The difference, of course, was that Clinton's taste was better than the guys'.

Anyway, I love the show, and Stacey's grey hair.

posted by guest

Jan 09, 2008 10:00AM

I love WNTW even if there sometimes is too much formula. But one major reason these shows are so popular is that they are great for product placement. Everytime they go to Macys, Club Monaco, or mention Bank of America Visa, or show certain cosmetics, TLC/BBC get money. These deals make these shows practically free--Survivor costs nothing to produce after product placements are taken into account and I would imagine WNTW is pretty cheap TV too. And these makeover shows may not reach a huge audience in terms of numbers (many men won't touch them, and there's a lot of women out there who aren't interested in clothes), but those who are into them like them a lot--and this also delivers the ideal audience to the sponsors and advertisers.

posted by guest

Jan 09, 2008 4:31PM

you're missing the point of the show...to make money for the network. they don't care if anyone changes permanantly. people just wantt to see a makeover, that's all..

posted by guest

Jan 10, 2008 9:40AM

i don't think the bbc can make money from product placement can it?

posted by shinyredthermos

Jan 11, 2008 12:05PM

because i cant stop staring at stacey's streak of grey. work it girl.

posted by guest

Jan 15, 2008 12:50PM

Yes, the BBC can and does make money from product placement. BBC America is a commercial division of the BBC and is designed to make money to offset the costs to the British public and supplement the licence fee--hence the ads on BBC America, the revenue from dvds etc.