April 27, 2008

"What Not to Wear" is not the kind of reality show I would normally watch.

It's a "how-to" reality show, to use the Television Without Pity categories. The reality shows I enjoy are nearly all in the "competitive" category: "Survivor," "America's Next Top Model," "Project Runway," and — though "enjoy" isn't really the right word — "American Idol." I used to like "The Apprentice" and "Top Chef," too, but I don't want to watch any more seasons of the thing. I've had enough. The other category of reality show is "candid," and I love this category when it's at its best, like the first season of "The Osbournes" or the third season of "The Real World." The first season of "The Newlyweds" was good, and I don't mind stooping to some really trashy things sometimes, like "Wife Swap" and, in its day, the Anna Nicole Smith show — was it called "The Anna Nicole Smith Show"? But how-to? I don't want anybody telling me what to do, so why would it entertain me to see some purported experts telling somebody else what to do? But I watched the new episode of "What Not to Wear" because part of it was filmed at a cool Brooklyn shop called Lee Lee's Valise: DSC07983 This place is run by the wife of one of our very best commenters here on the Althouse blog, Trooper York. And he tipped me off that they were filming the episode, so I came down to the shop that evening after my class. The filming was over, but the stars of the show were there along with their how-to victim, and I wanted to photograph the store. Dress shop I wasn't trying to photograph the characters from the show or even act like I noticed them. I talked to the guy a little at one point, but just in the way that a shopper would chat with another customer. I didn't want to bother them, and I certainly wasn't going to act like a fan of the show, which I'm not. In fact, I still don't know the man's name. I'd have to look it up even now. Trooper York showed me a lot of merchandise and explained his theory of the place, which was very well worked out to appeal to young women who need large sizes but don't want to be hit in the face with the fact they they are shopping in a large-sizes store. The place is at the intersection of Court and President streets, which is easy for law types to remember — 2 out of the 3 branches of government. Anyway, I just watched the show, which made over a 29-year-old woman who is a student at my old law school NYU. They converged on her at some law lecture and, horrifyingly informed her that they'd been secretly filming her to get footage of her wearing terrible clothes. They must get some kind of advance approval before they start the filming, right? If someone did that to me without my prior approval, I'd want to sue them. It's stalking! So then they have to tell her everything she thinks is wrong, even when it isn't. She wears black skirts. Yes, most of them are too large, but the woman has lost a 100 pounds and is still in the process of losing weight. But the basic idea of wearing black skirts is obviously a good one, and the experts insist that it's not, and then they have to backtrack and say that actually it is. They are shocked that she wears black knee-high hosiery instead of full tights under a long skirt, but why? It's comfortable and invisible unless you yank up her skirt — which the fashion experts did, for the amusement of TV viewers. She had a nice, neat black jacket that was just way too large, but instead of talking about how she needed new clothes because she's lost so much weight, the experts showed her a completely different style of jacket, a gray plaid thing that they insisted was "young" and "professional" because it had wide, high lapels and buttoned up tightly under the breasts. There was no acknowledgment at all that the jacket won't look right or feel right buttoned up like that when she's sitting down, which she will be nearly all of the time working as a lawyer. They showed her a gaudy dress and contended that a loud print camouflages the shape of your body. This seemed insane, and it was also inconsistent with another one of their theories — that you should love your body as it is and show off the shape you have. They spent some time doing the young woman's hair and makeup. Since she really needed a good haircut and wasn't wearing any makeup, this made a big improvement, but it had nothing to do with "what not to wear." Nor did it teach us anything useful. You already know you need to get a good haircut, don't you? And what woman doesn't realize she'd look better with some foundation and a little eye and lip makeup? That's not hard. The show ends with everyone celebrating the amazing changes in the woman's appearance. You have scenes where everyone claps and cheers and the makeover target twirls around in her new clothes — which look ugly to me — and professes to be transformed. We're assured — typical woman's TV pap — that the young woman was always a wonderful person and now her exterior matches her wonderful interior. Blah! I'd rather see a show where philosophers descend on a woman with a perfect exterior and rip into her for her intellectual and spiritual failings, put her on some kind of internally transformative regime, and turn her into a human being of substance. Can we get that?

51 comments:

Meade said...

Labels: "Project Runway", "Survivor", "The Apprentice", "The Osbournes", American Idol, Brooklyn, commerce, fashion, fat, law, law school, off-blog Althouse, photography, TV, women's TV, larger-than-life-SuperBowl-winning Althouse commenters

rhhardin said...

You already know you need to get a good haircut, don't you?

I started cutting my own hair long ago. If you're going to get a bad haircut, you might as well do it yourself, and for $19.95 at Kmart there was the kit I needed. I've saved a fortune in bad haircuts.

And then it turns out you don't really need real bad haircut occasions ; if something feels a bit shaggy, just snip it off what feels shaggy as you walk by the scissors.

The era of the continuous, self-administered microhaircuts had begun.

I await a ``things you don't have to do'' show for guys.

Meade said...

who sell ladies undergarments

Meade said...

RHHardin: Not a slave to anything

AllenS said...

I have a question that I'd like someone to answer. Something that I've noticed for quite a while, is this: when was it cool for men to not comb their hair? What's up with that? Who started it?

Meade said...

I don't know but I think we can safely rule out Bobby Goldsboro

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
George M. Spencer said...

This show is for teenage girls, as is America's Next Top Model.

My daughter watches it with the rapt interest that my son has for Japanese gameshow physical challenge programs, survival programs, and jackass.

A teen's worst fear is to be publicly humliated for any number of unknown missteps. It's all about learning to navigate the jungle of modern horrors. Who will teach the children this valuable cultural information, if not our TV elders?

Ron said...

show where philosophers descend on a woman with a perfect exterior and rip into her for her intellectual and spiritual failings, put her on some kind of internally transformative regime,

Descartes don't move lingerie, that's why you won't see it!

Plus, Oprah might not approve...

ricpic said...

Trooper York's shop has a gemutlich* quality to it judging by the photo of the interior. It must be comforting for a woman to search for clothes in what feels more like a living room than an impersonal space.
I also like the lighting. So much better than the harsh overhead lighting in most clothing stores.


*I'm umlautless. Provide your own. Over the u, of course!

mystickeeper said...

I like this entry a lot! You point out a lot of things that I hate about that show, and I agree - if my sister or anyone else I know ever had me stalked for days (or weeks?!), I would be ready to sue.

knox said...

I'm so busted... I like What Not to Wear. I will admit when I watch it, I fast-forward through the "ambush" segment. But I think it's very hard to look at yourself objectively and see the mistakes you're making: that's what a show like this helps people do. I know that I've unexpectedly caught my own reflection in a window or something and what I'm wearing looks totally different than how I thought it did. Most people get stuck in a rut and can't even see they could look a lot better.

I just watched this episode myself and I think she *was* making a big mistake with the black skirts down to the ankles! A lot of times they forbid people to buy what they've been wearing just to break the cycle...

(The original BBC show and hosts are light-years better.)


*Bracing myself for rhhardin to excoriate me for not being sensible, practical, wasting my time on silly stupid shows, and the usual*

rhhardin said...

A guys' show would point out the virtues of white, in that everything goes in the same load in the washing machine.

Load it up once and it's all done.

Buy enough underwear for 25 days. Then everything just fits in one load.

Your washing machine may be different. Experiment as necessary.

Bissage said...

(1) I hope some day I can drop by Lee Lee’s Valise to see the computer from which Trooper posts some of his comments. You know, before they put it in the Smithsonian next to Satchmo’s horn.

(2) SPANX? That’s weird because my brother-in-law had a pet monkey named Spanx.

(3) Call me old-fashioned, but I would never advise a young female lawyer to “show off the shape you have.” There are exceptions, of course. It is sometimes appropriate for a young female lawyer to show off her shape to me . . . naked.

(4) Bobby Goldsboro’s hair was the best, no doubt about it. But it’s important to remember there once was a time when ordinary men (like my father and the guy next door and Dr. Klineman and my sixth grade teacher) would spend a half-hour in front of the mirror fetishizing their hair. And who can blame them?

(5) Hey! I just had a cathartic breakthrough. All these years I thought my mother was doing the guy next door (and Dr. Klineman and my sixth grade teacher and God knows who else) because I was a dirty, rotten, no-good little kid. But now I realize it was the hair all along!

(6) It was the hair . . .

(7) s n i f f .

(8) [Reaches for Kleenex.]

Jennifer said...

I love What Not To Wear. I just watched the first episode I've seen in a long time after getting cable again the other day.

I think one thing you have to remember is that they are teaching the fashion equivalent of kindergarteners how to improve their style in a very short period of time. They use broad generalizations that will most help that individual and that even the most style stupid person can grasp onto. Maybe eventually that person can refine their understanding.

Their whole mantra is to understand what works for you. I really don't think they expect everybody to grasp every pronouncement and apply it to themselves.

As far as the undercover filming goes, they're mostly filming people outside on the street. You do the same thing with your camera when crusing around Brooklyn. When they are at an event the person attended, I'm sure they have the permission of the proper people related to the event and the venue. And of course they get a release before they actually air the footage.

sandy shoes said...

I hate most television programming, including AI and its ilk.

But "a show where philosophers descend on [someone] with a perfect exterior and rip into [them] for [their] intellectual and spiritual failings, put [them] on some kind of internally transformative regime, and turn [them] into a human being of substance" would ROCK.

(Sorry for butchering the pronouns, I just don't think it would have to be a woman getting ripped into. I know the plural is awkward, but I think "him/her" is worse.)

Freder Frederson said...

I don't want anybody telling me what to do, so why would it entertain me to see some purported experts telling somebody else what to do?

Ann, I love you so much.

"I don't like people telling me what to do, but I do love telling other people how wrong they are--and what they should be doing."

Joan said...

I enjoy WNTW also. Ann's criticisms here are typical of someone opposed to the show's premise who therefore doesn't see any value in it for anyone else.

It's simply not true that everyone knows you need a good haircut; millions of women don't have one. Millions of women have no idea how to use makeup effectively. Millions of women are still wearing horrid "mommy" jeans with pleated waists and tapered legs, or worse, leggings. Millions of women think it's OK to wear oversized sweats all the time. I won't even get into flipflops and Crocs, which have their places (beach and garden, respectively) but have infected every area of society. Obviously there is an audience for the show.

I started watching it about four years ago, and in that time I've transformed my own wardrobe. What the show really teaches is how to shop for clothes that look good on you. How to pay attention to fit, silhouette, pattern size, and age-appropriateness. There is a huge variety in size, shape, and age of the participants, so if you wait long enough, they'll makeover someone just like you.

By now I've seen the show enough times that I fastforward through pretty much the whole thing until I get to the "after" part. Some makeover targets are really lively and fun to watch, others get on my nerves. And to whoever said the British girls (Trinny and Susannah) are better than Stacey and Clinton is, in my opinion, daft. Stacey and Clinton may be harsh, but they nowhere approach the sheer brutality of Trinny and Susannah. And while the American show suffers from a bit of padding, the British version suffers more from being way too short!

Ann Althouse said...

I certainly agree that many people wear terrible clothes, but I don't buy the advice these experts are giving out. They proclaim things great that look bad to me. They state things as rules that just aren't believable, and I don't even think they believe them. And they are trying to make someone look impressive on TV, not so much in real life. People often dress in what looks bad because they want to be comfortable. Putting them in some tightly constructed jackets and pants might look good on TV, but I don't think the person is really going to wear those clothes.

And in the part of the show where they are rejecting things and throwing them in the trash, they are like really bad prop comics. There's a striped shirt and the woman is a future lawyer, so they try to say something about looking like a prisoner. They said one top looked like it would be worn by a former belly dancer in a retirement home, which was sort of funny. But later, I thought the garishly patterned tops had just as much of a glamour-girl in retirement look to them. But they tell you this is young, this is in fashion. I think you could just as well have a meta version of the show with 2 more snarksters watching them and mocking them.

knox said...

they are like really bad prop comics

Joan, this is why I prefer the British hosts. Stacey and Clinton try too hard to be funny and it comes off as forced. Trinny and Susannah are effortlessly witty. I totally don't get the assessment that they're meaner... they seem much more genuinely affectionate and invested in their guests. Oh well, to each her own.

Chet said...

" If someone did that to me without my prior approval, I'd want to sue them. It's stalking!"

Really? If someone told you your bra strap was showing, or your fly was unzipped.....I don't see how that's stalking. To not say something, and just let someone walk around like that is inappropriate.

Chet said...

It's not as if Lane Bryant has signs all over the place saying:

"You're a fat dumpy mess, now shut-up and pour yourself into whatever caftans and mumuus we toss at you!"

Yet, I doubt plus-size women need to be coddled and sheltered from the truth of their situation. Sometimes it's good to face up to reality and not pretend.

Finn Alexander Kristiansen said...

Chet I dunno...

I shop at Big and Tall stores, and I am not tall, so I always kind of feel weird when the shopping bag lets everyone know. I like the delusion of thinking I am not large (okay fat), unless someone looks at the bag and says, "Oh, the big and tall store, he's fat".

I would imagine women like things even more discreet. Persons of Plus Size have many issues.

Unknown said...

I watch the show, and I think it's great. The only problem is the hairdresser because he is horrible and chops everyone's hair off, even when it looks bad to do so. But overall, they make people more successful and feel better about themselves. Some people think it's okay to wear an oversized T-shirt and jeans to an interview and they show them how that's not okay and what would be better. They also show a lot of women how to make their bodies look better in clothes which boosts their self-esteem. What's wrong with that?

Melinda said...

I'm a fan of WNTW too, and I last saw my teens during the Ford administration.

In fact, I saw that episode on Friday night and I wondered if that was Trooper's wife's store, since I'd read on his blog that "the Professor" was "talking to Stacy and Clinton."

I love it and I make fun of it, especially the hairdresser. "Yaw heh has to all come off."

Joan said...

I think the women often end up in clothes I don't like, but so what? They love them, and that's what matters! Everyone is entitled to a personal style, and I like the fact that Stacey and Clinton try to understand each woman, what she likes and dislikes, if she even knows herself. Many women don't.

I agree that suit was horrible, but then again, I'm not a 20-something junior lawyer. That generation wears a lot of clothing I don't find attractive, but they all love it.

I have innoculated myself against all the forced gags by fast-forwarding through pretty much all of that. I guess if I had to sit through that every week, it would drive me nuts, but I've been watching the show for about 5 years now and I know the routine, there's nothing new there, so I don't bother to watch it. I do like the 360-degree mirror, though. Those things are brutally revealing.

It has been a long time since I've seen Trinny and Susannah, but I don't think I'll ever forget the attempt they made, several years ago, to get a bleached-blonde, blue eye-shadowed, 40-ish woman to stop wearing her 13-year-old daughter's clothes. They succeeded admirably, with new hair, makeup, and clothing, but the "after" footage caught the Mum having completely chucked everything they did to her. She was mucking out her stables in the most gorgeous pair of heather tweed trousers! But she'd told them that was what she would do, they just couldn't believe it. The problem with that one was, the woman didn't want to look or dress her age, because that made her feel old. They failed to get her to realize that by dressing 30 years younger than she actually was, she made herself look older and very foolish. It was sad.

Jennifer said...

They proclaim things great that look bad to me.

I think it's on a scale. Some of these women aren't going to look good no matter what is put on them.

Unknown said...

I find this show to be comical and forthright. They aren't afraid to give good advice (what looks terrible and what looks good). I love when they categorize jeans like "mom jeans." I believe, though, that the hosts pick out what is best for the person. It is not a cookie cutter show and that is why I think it has continued. It is about the individual and incorporating new techniques to show off her best features.

Trooper York said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Trooper York said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Ann Althouse said...

Hi, Trooper. I was afraid you were upset about the post!

Trooper York said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Trooper York said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
blake said...

I had some friends who were on Design on a Dime. They redesigned an odd-little solarium that they had.

They have a $1000 budget, but this is strictly for material. They did several thousand bucks worth of work which, of course, you wouldn't be able to avoid paying for (unless you had ALL of their respective abilities, which you don't).

Worst of all, though, they made him throw out this leather reclining couch. It was a two-or-three seater that reclined independently. It didn't look bad--though it was definitely the sort of thing that the clingy-to-guns-and-religion types would go for.

They replaced it with a day bed and proclaimed it "as comfortable or even more" than the couch, which was an outright lie. Unless, of course, the couch's aesthetic properties made you uncomfortable. My buddy's disappointment is palpable. It comes through the TV screen as you watch the show.

I realized this is a show aimed at women and gay men. The guy version would be: "Big screen TV: $900. Small beverage cooler: $100. Done."

But I suppose that's not interesting, either.

blake said...

And, hey, way to go Troop! Let's hear it for free advertising!

Fen said...

Pffft! I'd fly across the table and scalp him with butterknife. Good for ratings, not so good for the show's longevity.

Millions of women have no idea how to use makeup effectively. Millions of women are still wearing horrid "mommy" jeans with pleated waists and tapered legs, or worse, leggings. Millions of women think it's OK to wear oversized sweats all the time.

Bras. I'm amazed at how many women don't know how to fit themselves for the right size bra.

And don't make me explain to my wife how I know this.

MadisonMan said...

Trooper, the store looks like a nice place to shop. If one liked to shop, that is.

Ralph L said...

so I always kind of feel weird when the shopping bag lets everyone know.
Unless you have a cloak of invisibility, we don't need to read the bag.

Unknown said...

Ralph-
I disagree! You'd be surprise how someone can go to thinking one is "normal" to "fat" just with the drop of that size number. People have an idea- I'm not fat until. . . I have to shop at the fat store, I'm a size 14 or 16 or 18 or 20. When they here X person is in that catagory BAM! that person is fat! Even if 10 seconds ago they weren't!

Also a big fan of WNTW- I agree that often the clothes are a little unrealistic or inappropriate for the life. However it takes no longer to put on dark, straight leg well fitting jeans than sweatpants. It's no less comfortable to wear a nice skirt than sweats, and a v neck wrap top is probably as comfortable as the big T. So, most days most times the contributors just have to get over the idea of not liking how they look or not feeling comfortable.

Also, they do occasionally make over men. They always look fabulous, but a lot like Clinton!

Ralph L said...

CJ, it may hit it home to him, but the rest of us don't know his size number, and don't need to. But Titus is the only one who cares.

Christy said...

I'd rather see a show where philosophers descend on a woman with a perfect exterior and rip into her for her intellectual and spiritual failings, put her on some kind of internally transformative regime, and turn her into a human being of substance. Can we get that?

1946, Garson Kanin's Born Yesterday. Ran for 2 years.
The rest is history.

Joan said...

I'd rather see a show [...] put her on some kind of internally transformative regime...

That's the thing about WNTW: in many -- not all, but many -- cases, the women are transformed internally as well as externally. So many of them had lost their sense of self through years of mothering, juggling careers and family, or simply getting older and giving up. Maybe they're not given any more substance, but they're shown that they have value, that yes, it's worth it for them to take care of their appearance because of everything that communicates. I'm not doing a good job of describing what happens on the show, but I know it's the main reason I watch it. It's uplifting.

Bissage said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Bissage said...

Jeez Louise! I praise Trooper by likening his comments to Louis Armstrong’s music and I get called envious.

It’s as if he thinks being called Satchmo is a bad thing.

What am I supposed to make of that?

I’ve got it!

Love, Johnny Nucleo.

(Heh.)

kjbe said...

Blah! I'd rather see a show where philosophers descend on a woman with a perfect exterior and rip into her for her intellectual and spiritual failings, put her on some kind of internally transformative regime, and turn her into a human being of substance. Can we get that?

I think we have it - Intervention - especially with the functioning addicts. It's quite hard to watch.

Trooper York said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Trooper York said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Trooper York said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
MPaula said...

Regarding these "know how to dress yourself" shows the only one really good and with real knowledge is Tim Gunn. The rest is worthless...

Structure is everything!

Ann Althouse said...

Trooper York said...
Sure I don’t pay attention for one day and look what happens! Well they say any advertising is good advertising so thanks for the plug.

Most reality shows start by breaking down the participants and then building them up. Trump mocks and belittles the apprentices and Gordon Ramsey basically terrorizes them on Hell’s Kitchen. So What Not to Wear follows the formula. All of the participants are happy to be there or they would not sign the release. In real life Stacy and Clinton are really wonderful people who are both kind and supportive so the subjects never take the jokes to heart. The clothes that the subjects pick are not necessarily what the hosts would pick, but as long as they generally follow their advice they are supportive of their choices. Now what they pick is obviously a matter of taste which not everyone will agree on as witness the comments above. They are often not what my wife would pick. But you have to learn to let people pick what they like, not what you want them to wear. I find it very interesting that many of the women of Althouse have commented and most seem to enjoy the show.
I knew squat about woman’s clothing when we opened the store, but I think I have learned a lot since then. One of the things I have learned is that everyone has issues about how they look. Our goal is to give them a family feeling while they shop when they can get out of their comfort zone and have a choice. Ricpic hit the nail on the head. It’s like hanging out with friends and family while shopping without the nasty comments from the peanut gallery. It is a misnomer to think that only people at the far ends of the scales have problems. I see a lot of first time moms who go from a size 8 to a size 12 and can’t find anything to wear that aren’t “old lady” clothes. So we offer a lot of choices in a lot of fashion forward, dare I say cool clothes. Weight goes up and down. But there is no reason why you can’t look good and feel good right now. My job is to entertain the husbands and boyfriends with jokes and stories so they don’t get bored and want to split or make belittling remarks. It would of course be my pleasure to smack the shit out of anyone who wants to make such remarks (including several people on this blog and unlike Mort I really mean it).

Sorry for the long post, I promise to keep it short and funny next time. All the best, your pal Trooper.

4/27/08 8:46 PM
Trooper York said...
I always thought Johnny Nucleo was green because he was a Maritian. Now I understand. Peace.

4/27/08 8:48 PM
Ann Althouse said...
Hi, Trooper. I was afraid you were upset about the post!

4/27/08 8:49 PM
Trooper York said...
Nah, I was busy selling bloomers.
And Meade, don't knock it until you try it. There are worst things to do on a rainy Sunday than talking to women about their underwear.

4/27/08 8:54 PM
Trooper York said...
I did pitch the producer on a new show called What Not to Think with Fen and Cyrus offering dueling advice to confused voters. But he told me that would be too boring, even for cable.

4/27/08 8:56 PM