It's OK for intellectual feminists to like fashion

Audrey Hepburn is covering Vanity Fair this month, a few months after she covered Tatler. She’s also been the face of GAP and Galaxy. That’s a lot more covers and campaigns than many actresses alive get.

Hepburn was an amazing actress, a dedicated humanitarian and, as a person who went from nearly starving during World War II to the heights of Hollywood, an inspirational tale of where hard work and resilience can lead.

“Sometimes I ask myself, “How would Audrey Hepburn handle this?”” (Henceforth to be shortened to The Question), Natalie Massenet admitted to Hester Lacey (Financial Times) when asked, ”Who was or still is your mentor?” for The Inventory’s question last May.

Who hasn’t asked The Question? When faced with a difficult situation or wondering how to improve our selves, we often look to people we admire, questioning how they would handle things.

The Question has given birth to a juicy business exemplified by Pamela Keogh’s book What Would Audrey Do?: Timeless Lessons for Living with Grace & Style, a part biography, part rule book suggesting following Hepburn’s attitude can better your own life. The Question even has its own Twitter, Facebook and Pinterest profiles that offer Hepburn’s “best quotes, photos, fashion tips and everything else you need to know to live a fabulous life”. They are part of a marketing campaign by an author writing a teen book on Hepburn. Who cares whether Hepburn would actually have been a social media user (Keogh suggests not)?

When do you stop asking The Question? If Massenet “the founder of Net-A-Porter, the hugely successful luxury fashion retail website”, with style credentials equal to Hepburn’s and a vision and achievements spanning technology and fashion, is any indication, never.

In fact, Massenet’s career makes her the perfect subject for The Question. “What would Natalie Massenet do?” many professionals wonder. I most certainly do, alongside its sister questions focused on Hillary Clinton, Madeleine Albright, Anna Wintour, Christine Lagarde, Coco Chanel, Sheryl Sandberg, my friend Stacy, some of the very impressive women I have the chance to work with, C.J. Cregg and Scarlett O’Hara. They’re fictional? Does it matter? The Question is purely theoretical. We build an answer based on the skewed understanding of a character, of her public achievements and image. This is not really about how she would handle it, it’s more about how she would appear to handle it.

Raising The Question to people I am close to has taught me that answering it is hazardous at best. On more than one occasion, when discussing a particular situation, I realised they didn’t have an answer any more than I did and that their way wouldn’t necessarily work for me. Not that it’s stopped me.

The Question is more about working out an answer by trying to glimpse alternatives through another personality, about getting advice, even if it’s fictional, and about being comforted in one’s position. I have multiple versions of The Question because each person can bring the answer I need most, which can often be translated as the answer which comforts me in my way.

Depending on my Monday morning mood, I can look up to Anna Wintour, famous for getting up at 5am to play tennis or to Audrey Hepburn, who according to Keogh, stopped exercising. And it doesn’t matter that picking the role model most practical for me at this time defeats the purpose of choosing a role model in the first place.

In the Vanity Fair feature on Hepburn, her son’s new book on her time in Rome is anecdotal. What the media have picked up on is that she “never thought she was beautiful”.

That’s the thing about The Question. We like looking up to these people for inspiration, but we also like knowing that role models have the same doubts and feeling as us, that they’re human. Because if despite all these doubts, they achieved what they achieved, why wouldn’t we manage to?

Posted at 11:35am and tagged with: net-a-porter, feminism, career,.

July 4th 2012

Book Review: The Man who Left too Soon A Biography of Stieg Larsson

1 note

I was late to the Millennium party, only reading Lisbeth Salander’s story in March. This is not something you can accuse UK crime fiction expert Barry Forshaw of. His biography of Swedish author Stieg Larsson displays all the characteristics of a book written and edited too quickly to make the most of a new phenomenon, or a current affairs event: the editing is uneven (people called alternatively by their first and last names is a particular pet peeve of mine), it contains too many repetition easily mistakable for page fillers (I understood Larsson’s death was accidental, despite the conspiracy theories, the first three times, ta very much) and it displays a botch structure.

The Millennium trilogy (The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, The Girl who Played with Fire and The Girl who Kicked the Hornets’ Nest) is at the heart of the biography. In his introduction, Forshaw argues Larsson’s “biography is, to some extent, to be found in his books”, promising to discuss both the novels faults and felicities (his words). Yet he falls short of either, drawing parallels anyone with an Internet connection or a Psychology magazine subscription could have done: there is a lot of Larsson’s personality in Mikael Blomkvist, from his journalism job, engaged magazine ownership and disregard for his health to his wishful realisation of all women falling for him. Forshaw’s 152 pages long summary of the books won’t teach you anything if you’ve already read them (A few factual errors even found their way into the paraphrasing) and will either be lost on you or reveal too much if you haven’t. It displays few qualities of literary criticism, beyond regretting Larsson’s editing wasn’t tighter and remarking on his ability to keep the reader interested, after testing him with lengthy information, in a move Forshaw compares with Marcel Proust Swan’s Way. Forshaw’s biography could be put down to commercial accumen, intellectual curiosity, admiration or hatred of Larsson’s writing yet his summary, for all its flaws, is balanced, suggesting the Millennium description of sex and violence owes more to commercial imperatives and voyeuristic vibe than to narrative necessity.

The book really comes together in its seventh chapter, when Forshaw, making the most of his literary expertise and contacts interviews the best contemporary crime writers on their views on Larsson. The consensus is that the third book is the worse one, prompting questions on his ability to maintain momentum, that his untimely death added mystic to his books, that they sold well in the UK because the atmosphere is GB-grim and that his journalism and knowledge of the far right was laudable. Sadly, and rather lazily, all interviews are presented as lengthy quotes after an introduction of each writer’s crime credentials, leading to repetitions. These literary opinions would have been stronger split out by theme, for instance focusing on Larsson’s legacy (this was a trilogy with an agenda, has it changed anything in Swedish society?), his place amongst other crime writers, Nordic or else (chapter 6 lists biographies of the best Scandinavian crime writers without establishing links with Larsson) and the feminist aspect of his writing. This last point could have benefited from interviews with feminist thinkers, academics and campaigners.

The lack of original material is this biography’s biggest flaw. Beside the authors quoted in chapter 7, hindsight from Larsson’s international editors and translators on how they discovered the books and translated them, there is a lack of anecdotes on Larsson’s life beyond the usual chain-smoking, workaholic, far-right fighting journalist he’s known to be. Perhaps thanks to this reporting, Forshaw manages not to overtly take side for or against his character, reporting on facts such as his rumoured estrangement from his family and the controversy over his authorship of Millennium without delving in or bringing new material.

Forshaw’s crime credentials, expertise, knowledge and bibliography made him the perfect British writer to tackle Larsson’s life and writings. Yet, getting his biography out first only managed to highlight the holes in our knowledge of Larsson’s life, our understanding of his personality and the lack of proper study carried out on his fiction oeuvre so far.

Barry Forshaw, The Man Who Left Too Soon: the Biography of Stieg Larsson (John Blake, 2010)

Posted at 7:58pm and tagged with: book review, feminism,.

February 24th 2012

The end of Mademoiselle, symbolic gesture or societal progress?

2 notes

If Coco Chanel was still alive today, we’d have to call her Madame Chanel. Or at least French red tape would. After years of debate and lobbying from feminist associations, the French government signaled the end of the Mademoiselle box in all, but not beyond, administrative paperwork, effective immediately, as per Circulaire 5575/SG published by the Premier Ministre’s office 21 February. Mademoiselle was used for any unmarried French woman, no matter her age. The Prime Minister called it “a term referring, without necessity or justification, to the female marital status”(1).

Upon learning the change, Fashion Carrousel cried “non mais j’y tiens à mon mademoiselle !” (“But I do like my Mademoiselle”). She’s not the only one. In left-leaning weekly Le Nouvel Obs, Lydia Guirous, founder of Future, au Féminin, a feminist association fighting against the Americanisation of French feminism, denounced the move as “Tupperware feminism”(2), mentioning the “many women happy to be called Mademoiselle”(3).

Differentiating married women from unmarried women, without inflicting the same to men, was an administrative throw back to yesteryear, when women were defined by their marital status. Although an improvement, the decision, which had long been supported by feminist associations Osez le Féminisme! and Les Chiennes de Garde is little more than a symbolic gesture announced in time for the April presidential elections. Lacking support from the bodies guardian of the French language, such as the Académie Française, the circular is unlikely to start a radical mentality change.

Although inequalities need to be made right, one at a time, some matter more than others. Suppressing Mademoiselle from official forms is lobbying procrastination: doing the small tasks first because you feel a sense of achievement while dreading and postponing the ones which really need your attention.

(1) Circulaire n° 5575/SG du 21 février 2012 relative à la suppression des termes ‘Mademoiselle’, ‘nom de jeune fille’, ‘nom patronymique’, ‘nom d’épouse’ et ‘nom d’époux’ des formulaires et correspondances des administrations, Translation my own

(2)(3) Lydia Guirous, “Campagne féministe : je me rejouis que l’on m’appelle mademoiselle” 10 January 2011, Nouvelobs.com

Posted at 6:24pm and tagged with: feminism, france, chanel,.

December 20th 2011

25 November: Violence, Sainte Catherine and singledom

Each year, 25 November marks the International Day for the Elimination of Violence against women, as designated in 1999 by the United Nations General Assembly. Over a decade later, in 2010, the French government decided to set up, on that same day, a Journée Nationale contre les Violences Faites aux Femmes. In France, 25 November also happens to be la sainte Catherine, commemorating St. Catherine of Alexandria, the third century Catholic noblewoman beheaded for her talent for converting people close to Emperor Maximinus, including his wife. This day is also the occasion to remind any unmarried 25-year-old she is unmarried and should pray to the saint to be given a husband, lest she becomes a spinster. The custom, which includes the gift of a silly hat, has somewhat died down since marriage is about as popular in France as anywhere in the Northern hemisphere but some companies still organise ceremonies where single women pose for posterity and the local newspaper in their hats. Without diminishing the horror of being beaten up by comparing it to the teasing received for being 25 and single, since men do not entertain a similar holiday, I consider the double standard an institutionalised form of bullying and a most unfortunate calendar superimposition.

Previously: Single and 25? Get a Hat.

Photo: France, Auvergne, Moulins-sur-Allier (03) : Basilique-cathédrale Notre-Dame de l’Annonciation, XVe. : Sainte Catherine, vitrail; Flickr user Vincent Desjardins

Posted at 10:00am and tagged with: france, feminism,.

November 30th 2011

On flight attendants waist, then and now

1 note

With the UK broadcast of American TV series Pan Am (which I highly recommend), there’s been a lot of talk about how, back in the days, flights attendants had to wear a girdle, make-up and meet an airline-approved weight. Not-too-surprising horror stories have started circulating about sexual harassment by passengers and the importance given to look on the job, somewhat reminiscent of American Apparel and Abercrombie and Fitch HR policies.

Anyone having flown recently might tell you that, thankfully, not all flight attendants are models anymore, to the extent that some passengers complain about the lack of obvious beauty routine and scruffiness of stewardesses. British Airways however still fantasises over its employees upholding current Western, unrealistic standards of beauty as well as ensuring passengers well-being and security. Proof is, the current in-flight security video which displays a female flight attendant (never mind many in the profession are now men) teetering around the airport in heels with a waist so tiny and legs so long they would make Barbie jealous.

Posted at 10:01am and tagged with: TV series, feminism,.

November 20th 2011

Mapping women’s thoughts, then and now

17 notes

The American Antiquarian Society is currently exhibiting a 19th century Map of the Open Country of a Woman’s Heart which might or might not have been drawn by a woman. According to the Beauty, Virtue & Vice exhibition website,

Although the image claims to have been drawn by “A Lady,” it is just as likely that it proceeded from the imagination of a man.

Since the map surfaced, online writers have suggested no woman would ever print such a description of her own heart, Jezebel presenting it as the work of a vengeful, unsuccessful suitor:

“The Region of Platonic Affection.” Ouch. Methinks the artist has spent a little too much time there.

D.W. Kellogg might have been one of the many sexist, misogynistic men who lived in the 19th century or one of the many women who internalised the sexism and misogyny of their society, a form of gaslighting before the behaviour was named.

The French Laboratoire de l’Egalité, a body studying equality and behaviour between sexes, published a report last week showing that 84% of French citizens acknowledge repeating and believing in stereotypes. A significant 32% believe that the male and female brains are different and 30% believe boys are better at maths and science and girls better at humanities. And this is 2011. Not that we’ve stopped trying to map the female thought process anyway, or that the representations are any less sexist.

Posted at 4:16pm and tagged with: france, feminism, exhibition,.

October 23rd 2011

Tom, are you calling your customers bitches?

6 notes

Dear Tom,

Was naming one of your new nail lacquer shades Bitter Bitch really appropriate? You’ve been labeled a misogynist time and time again, at Yves Saint Laurent, at Gucci and for your own label. Your adverts have featured finger blow jobs, a model displaying a male fragrance on her Brazilian-waxed pubis, women feeling up men and the infamous G-shaped pubic wax. What’s a little name calling compared with the introduction of porn in luxury advertising? How do you even come up with a name like this? Is this a comment on the colour of one’s soul when one “is bitter about her (his) life and the things that have happened to him (her) and decides to take it out on the world”? A wink to Maria Sveland? I love the colour but the name will make me think twice about buying it.

Posted at 6:26pm and tagged with: beauty, Tom Ford, open letter, feminism,.

September 25th 2011

Taking the choice out of bra buying

4 notes

Push up, plunge, padded, non-padded, full cup, half cup, underwired, strapless, convertible and any combination of the above. When it comes to picking a bra, women have a lot of choice, right? Wrong. Despite all the models you are faced with when walking into Agent Provocateur or Rigby & Peller, the type of bra you buy is pre-decided by your bra size. It’s as if bramakers, the fashion industry and society as a whole held a meeting one day where they decided what the ideal bra size would be. If you are under it, their offer is largely limited to push up and padded lingerie, underwiring optional. If you are over it, you will have no choice but to go minimising and unpadded, wiring compulsory.

In a 2010 interview with The Guardian, John Lewis’s Helen Spencer explained that:

Brands that are known for contemporary styles, such as Elle Macpherson’s Intimates, have worked hard to produce good products for G-cup customers. There are styles with plunging necklines that achieve the same look as smaller cups – a lot of engineering has gone into them. The improved range of styles makes people more comfortable about purchasing these larger sizes. They’re pretty bras.

What happens if you don’t want to “achieve the same look as smaller cups”? Take C., a 22 year old girl with a 36D bra size. Every time I go lingerie shopping with C. she gets frustrated by the models out of her reach. Bandeaux, triangle bras, balcony bras are all off limits. And no matter how many brands communicate on introducing bigger sizes, the bras available in those sizes represent a paired down offer of what a woman with average bra size could get, especially if you live far, far away from a flagship store.

C. can blame engineering as much as society and fashion for not having as much bra choice as she’d like. Bras have a reputation for being one of the hardest wardrobe items to put together. This doesn’t however justify issuing the bras which somehow manage to brave weight and gravity in less colours, patterns and materials than the ones easy to produce.

I, on the other hand, navigating between a 32B and a 34C depending on day, hormones and brands, generally get stuck with the styles out of C.’s access, whether I want it or not. True, I get a lot more choice than her but every time I ask the Rigby & Peller lady for a non-padded style, she comes back empty ended. And every time I leave the store, I am disappointed that no amount of research into bra engineering or the evolution of women’s body, not to mention decades of feminism turning the bra into a symbol, has given women more choice in buying this item.

Posted at 5:32pm and tagged with: feminism, lingerie, retail,.

July 30th 2011

Book review: July reading list, English edition

3 notes

Virginia Woolf, by Anthony Curtis

Well-researched, beautifully written and illustrated, Anthony Curtis’ biography of Virginia Woolf sheds light on her life, the Bloombsury set and how both influenced her writing. Without shying away from the usual controversies (was she a not-so-closeted antisemitic lesbian?), Curtis focuses on her writing rather than her already much-discussed mental illness. Drawing from contemporary accounts and extracts from her books, he doesn’t hesitate to switch to the first person to give his own views on her character and writings, be they articles, novels, disguised autobiographies or short stories. Probably a lot more enjoyable if you are highly familiar with Woolf’s writings.

The Uncommon Reader, by Alan Bennett

If you often feel that life gets in the way of reading a book, imagine what it would be like if you were the Queen, forced to hide your newly found love of literature from staff and subjects. By choosing the most unlikely character for a book on the power of reading and writing and what it might lead us to do (watch out for the ending), Bennett signs an extraordinary, hilarious and thought-provoking book. A book anyone who loves words needs to read and re-read. How far are you willing to go for literature?

Bringing Home the Birkin, by Michael Tonello

Oh the Birkin and its legendary waiting list. According to Tonello, this list is exactly that: a legend. Apparently, all you need to score a Birkin is spend enough in store on various accessories and ready-to-wear before asking for one. As a careered eBay Birkin reseller, he would know. From his initial realisation that Hermès sells better than anything else on eBay (and with bigger profit margins) to fine-tuning a sure-buy method for Birkins, Michael Tonello runs us through the stereotypes of Hermès sales assistants and a gallery of people orbiting around the luxury industry with good humour. The perfect summer autobiography de gare.

How to be a Woman, by Caitlin Moran

If I was a misogynistic bigot, I would be very afraid of Caitlin Moran. Her feminist and hilarious penwomanship hits in all the right spot with the strongest arm of them all: laughter. Weight, fashion, career, waxing, marriage, bras, motherhood, strip clubs: all the usual themes, treated with false lightness and real cheekiness. Forget the umpteenth wave of feminism, all you need is to rally around Moran.

Déjà Dead; Spider Bones, by Kathy Reichs

As a big fan of the Bones TV series, I had high expectations for the original Temperance Brennan character. The books preceded the TV show by about a decade. Their heroines couldn’t be more different, and I was lost for most of Spider Bones, trying to reconcile TV Dr Brennan with novel Dr Brennan. I shouldn’t have. The two women have little more than their job and intelligence in common and the novels are best enjoyed focusing solely on who Brennan is in the books.

Images: Virginia Woolf painting from Wikipedia; The Queen’s speech 2010 from the Daily Telegraph; Hermès from File Under Fashion; Cartoon from The Boar, February 2010

Posted at 8:33pm and tagged with: book review, TV series, Hermès, literature, Royal Family, feminism,.

February 13th 2011

What if women ruled the world?

3 notes

In its March 2011 issue, French Marie Claire published a fictional reportage by Elisabeth Alexandre: Et si les femmes dominaient le monde, ressemblerait-il à ça? If women ruled the world, would it look like that? And no, the idea isn’t that everything would be pinker and greener. If women ruled the world, men would be paid 28% less than women, only 12% of French MPs would be male and 78 000 French men would be raped every year. Sounds familiar? That’s because those are real statistics, which in the real 21st century world apply to women.

In her editorial, editor-in-chief Christine Leiritz explains

Imagine, for a moment only, that all those miseries inflicted to women were inflicted to men. Veiled, raped, repudiated men, men subjected to their wives, mothers, sisters, deprived from their basic rights, underpaid men, men forced to stay at home… in a word, martyr men? Weird how, all of a sudden, this world becomes obviously absurd, its unfairness evident! This would be unbearable, wouldn’t it? Yes, it would be unbearable.

Although the aim of the feature is laudable, I disagree with its execution. In Alexandre’s alternative reality, men can give birth, are objectified and hold to higher standards of personal grooming than women. In other words, she merely replaced the word man by woman throughout the article to get herself a feature. It’s not men as we know them who would be bullied by women but rather human beings with a vagina called men instead of women. The article doesn’t work because the author didn’t push the utopia far enough. Of course it’s impossible not to find Alexandre’s statistics shocking and horrifying. It’s also impossible not to be shocked and horrified by the idea that for women to wake up to the injustices they are subjected to, they need to read about them as if they happened to men.

Posted at 9:20pm and tagged with: magazine writing, feminism, Marie Claire, france,.