"Lumpy blue sweater"

I have been tracking the news du jour consistently since my last post, but since the topics are very very controversial, I thought it would be too risky and I would have a much bigger target on my back if I wrote about them. To be honest, I have already talked about them in vague terms in a number of my previous posts. Furthermore, I have also made my position and opinions known on various social media sites.

However, today I had a bit of a moment. Although I did not directly discuss innovation in my previous opinion pieces, I did discuss the implication of design, costs and thus prices. I have had a love-hate relationship with clothes and outfits since I can remember. I was never a girly girl growing up, and I always opted for comfort over femininity the vast majority of time. In fact, I still do, but what I find comfortable enough has changed. I now tolerate wearing things I wouldn't otherwise have when I younger, and perhaps I have stopped tolerating certain things I used to wear as well. Although to the girly girls out there, they might still find I toe the line between cross-dresser and menswear inspired women's fashion (I don't take it as an insult, because those of you that understand, understand). Also, I had to deal with numerous fashion cultural oopsies because I lived in different parts of the world, and certain styles are viewed differently.

To get to the point, I recently bought a pair of unisex style of shoes from a department store. After perusing around a division of the same department store, I found myself experiencing a shopping episode which would be a real-world example of Miranda Priestly's "curelean sweater" put down. Mind you, unlike Andy, I do not believe myself untouched by the fashion industry. However, when buying products from high street brands whose products are sold at department stores, sometimes you forget how those concepts came about. Ironically, department stores sell both designer goods (i.e. the design leaders) and high street goods (design followers to an extent). In all fairness, the product I bought is based on a classic design which has been done repeatedly over time; however, it was still quite obvious when I came across the designer's version, it was a rendition of it. Despite being cognizant of the designer-high street dynamic, I was still a bit taken aback. Usually, I just go for the "original" (or perhaps the brand which did it before the high street version) when I can afford it. Funnily enough, for this particular product, I actually prefer the variation of the high-street brand over the designer's. It fit my preference and so-called aesthetic more. I felt conflicted in that moment. If the high-street rendition had not existed, would I have even considered the shoes at all? Since the product is already a riff off of a classic design, maybe I shouldn't feel so conscious about buying the high-street rendition. It then made me think of all of the novels, plays and movies based on the works of e.g. Jane Austen, Shakespeare, Oscar Wilde etc. Isn't it a similar situation?