Saturday, November 15, 2008


Wearing my new CDG by H&M deconstructed wool jacket and transparent ruffled-sleeve blouse, with an H&M skirt and socks, Rachel Comey boots, an Antti Asplund cross necklace, and a crucifix knuckle ring of my own design.

In the wake of the CDG madness, and all the assorted sample sales that happened this week, my credit card is in dire need of a good long rest.  I can only justify this absurd spending by the fact that sample sale season only happens twice a year.

It all started at CDG for H&M on Thursday morning, where the lines were long, but the crowds were not nearly as frenzied as previous years.  Yes, there was plenty of screaming and shoving, but we all managed to leave with choice items.  I was particularly happy since I managed to snag one of the deconstructed wool jackets that I had been eyeing, in addition to a transparent white blouse with ruffled sleeve cuffs, that all the 66S Girls picked up.  I've been wearing both non-stop which looks preppy in passing, but upon closer inspection reveals subversive details.  The best part about the CDG jacket is confusing Jimmy, who thinks it looks very "street" and is completely perplexed by the open armpits, although he admits that they are "convenient."  He jokingly tried it on, but I actually think it looks quite good on him, although I doubt he'll be reaching into my wardrobe to borrow it.

A very cooperative Jimmy modeling the CDG for H&M blazer, showing that it works for boys too.

After CDG, we headed over to Fiftytwo Showroom designer Arak's sample sale, which was full of her perfectly constructed, colorful lingerie, all at a nice discount.  I finally picked up a romper that I've been ogling at the showroom, and a pair of undies, with added bonus of receiving a special showroom discount.  Definitely the most comfortable sleepwear I've ever owned.

Finally, this afternoon Ashley and I headed over to the Chloe sample sale, which had been mobbed on Thursday, but was much quieter today.  Almost everything was 80-90%, and the discount proved to be irresistible.  I loved Paulo Melim Andersson's SS08 collection for Chloe SS08, and had lustily fondled the beautiful crafted goods in the Madison Avenue store, where the 50% discount couldn't really do much for me.   Even though I had to wait till now, I picked up the dress from the Chloe ad campaign featuring Ali Stephens, reduced from a staggering $4,730 to $473.  It was a semi-coup, since I saw several other women who tried on the dress, but who couldn't figure out how to make it work, unaware of the hidden drawstring.

Chloe dress and heels, worn over a griege Araks romper for full coverage, at Jimmy's request.

Against the conventional wisdom of buying runway/editorial pieces at full price so you can wear them in season, and then buying the non-seasonal basics at sample sale, I believe that it is still a worthy investment to buy past season pieces that best represent the season's collection, and the designer.  While there were plenty of basic pants and skirts to be had, honestly, what's the point of buying a plain black skirt at Chloe when, aside from the label on the inside, it's indistinguishable from the one at H&M?  Yes, I know that it might be "so last season" to be one collection behind (not that I care, or could ever afford full retail prices), but in 10 years, those same pieces will be collectibles.

The dress modeled by Ali Stephens in Chloe's SS08 Ad Campaign.  You can see how revealing it is without any proper underwear!


Stumble Upon Toolbar


woodley park-zoo said...

I loved that ad and dress! And if I could afford to pick things up even past-season, I would do it just as you -- representative, collectible, and beautiful!

Is the dress SORT OF wearable without underthings? As in, if you're brave (and maybe with a bit of strategic body glue? ewws that sounds tacky now that I've typed it...) Or was it really only possible for the ad and in reality it has to be mixed as you have?

The Six Six Sick Girls said...

Ha! Funny that you should ask that question, as I had that very debate with Jimmy (my husband). I'm actually pretty brave when it comes to revealing clothes, and really love the openness of the dress. I'm a huge fan of tape, and go through packs and packs of it every year, and I even believe I could get away with wearing it without tape. I think the most revealing aspect however (and the one that Jimmy was least happy with) was the complete transparency, which was, to say the least, inappropriate. I'm sure I can find a better method of covering up without sacrificing the open nature of the dress, but in the meantime, the romper works pretty decently!

woodley park-zoo said...

Hrm... that is kind of unfortunate about the total transparency -- you'd think they could have made the top more user friendly for reality. I guess you might not want to 'hack' a designer piece but it might be possible to line it with some silk chiffon maybe at key points? Or you could do pasties! Heee...