#tumblr

Hollerrrr! About 27 years after everyone else, I now have a Tumblr. 

lisa-alexandra.tumblr.com

Perhaps I'll be a little better at updating it. This poor blog has been frightfully neglected recently. Je suis désolé!

topshop.com

The beguiling fashion weeks: one of those happenings that the world watches with awe. At least I do. Or used to. There has been such a shift recently! Now the notorious fashion blogger sits alongside the powerful players… ‘frow’ A/W 12? “Bryan Boy” and Largerfeld side by side… Jealous, moi? (Perhaps a weeny little bit…) Fashion weeks are becoming accessible to the lay(wo)man. Even better than that? The lay(wo)man at home. Even in bed if (s)he so fancies.

In 2011 Burberry set the trend by sharing its looks via Twitter before the clothes even hit the runway! Then for the S/S 13 Diane von Furstenberg show, Sergey Brin (top dog at Google) was in the frow... Quoi? Somehow the line between expressing creativity and a marketing window at Fashion Week blurred a long time ago – Mercedez Benz Fashion Week, sponsored by Vodafone and sponsored a little bit more by MasterCard anyone?! Brin and DvF were wearing some terrifically techy ‘Glass by Google’ frames – glasses with a little camera and a monitor in the frame, just incase the world through your smartphone doesn’t look rosy enough. Some of the models were even sent down the runway in them (although DvF didn’t design them..). The footage from the cameras has been turned into a short film that myself and Joe Bloggs can watch from the comfort of our pyjama bottoms in bed. #streetstyle #bedstyle

But this season it’s trusty Topshop that’s going all dot com. (Anybody else remember when Topshop was in a league with New Look, Dorothy Perkins et al??) Their A/W 12 show is going to be projected across topshop.com, YouTube and Google+. Not only that, but supermodel supreme du jour Cara Delevingne (as well as model Jourdan Dunn) will be wearing HD micro-cameras fitted into their outfits, giving lucky me and Joe Bloggs a model’s-eye view of everything show related... right from the first step onto the runway, to the manic outfit change backstage. Now if those fashion horror stories are true, (think periods and no pants. EW) then I’m not particularly positive that I want to see that..!

 Justin Cook, Topshop’s chief marketing officer, (emphasis here on marketing officer…) has gushed that “consumers will...be able to buy the nail polish the models are wearing and click on the clothes to re-colour them and pre-order them. This has the potential for digital wildfire.” Digital wildfire it may well be Justin, but for me it also somewhat ruins fashion week. Shouldn’t the clothes be the central factor? Isn’t part of the appeal and the attraction of the shows that we as the lay observer DON’T have unlimited access? For me the shows are all about DvF’s impressive creations, or Jil Sander’s clean cut lines. I’m not too bothered about how many iPad Minis Cara can count on the frow and frankly I don’t wish to know whether the no pants backstage horror stories are true!

To be honest I’m not really sure where I’m going with this argument, but that’s ok... I don’t think fashion week quite knows where it’s heading either.

(Duh, I'm obviously still going to watch the whole thing... hashtagging away to my hearts desire with the rest of them!)

Surfin' & Spendin'

One of my new year's resolutions has already gone out the window - to spend less time surfing, babe. Before you see me before you, all wind swept beach hair and hot bikini bod, I must disappoint you. I mean surfing the world wide web. 

I can easily waste hours reading blogs, online articles & features.. Having said that, if it weren't for this banal activity, I wouldn't have discovered gems such as the new British brand deetz. Their Lola top is YUM. A little pricey for my graduate self, it is made of silk though..!!

I may do a little overhaul of my 2013 resolutions. 

It's a clear thing

As I was indulging in a small spot of blog browsing the other day, I stumbled upon a post that, I’m not quite sure why, really got me thinking. May I present the see through Hermès Kelly bag – Plastic Edition 1996.

Obviously no way near as wonderfully manufactured and fetching as the real mccoy, I still thought that this was so funny!

But let me quickly introduce the ‘real’ Kelly bag.. Hermès launched it in 1935 as the Sac à dépêches, but it didn’t become famous until 1956, when Grace Kelly (then Princess of Monaco) used one to hide her pregnancy from the prying eyes of the paparazzi. It was promptly renamed ‘The Kelly’ in honour of Princess Grace. The bag comes in a variety of sizes, with prices starting at $7,000 and easily trumping $50,000! It takes a single craftsman about 18 hours to make a Kelly bag, which can be customized to the buyer’s specifications.

Now a Hermès Kelly (or a Birkin for that matter – one much closer to my heart) is one of those über fashion classics that I’ve always dreamt of having. You invest a sum of money in an amazing bag ONCE, that will accompany you for the rest of your life and will never date. (Any Hermès bag in any condition can be brought into their ateliers, where it will be restored to pristine condition free of charge!) Bliss. It’s one of those pieces where I’m a firm believer that either you invest the money in the real deal, or you buy a completely different bag.

Nevertheless this plastic number really tickled my fancy. I must admit I don’t know the actual price that it was sold for, but I definitely would consider a purchase! I simply think it’s super fun!

But... Let’s think about this more seriously. Who’s more stupid – the consumer (Me!) or the producer (Mr Hermès)? The consumer is 99.9% certainly paying a LOT of money for, yarrr, some plastic in an iconic shape. Namely, the producer is a genius. They’ve managed to convince us that this shape is SO iconic and SO desirable that we’re quite willing to ignore the fact that we’re not really getting the quality, but paying the quantity.

Or is the producer stupid? Surely they’re ripping themselves off? They’re downgrading from the finest quality leather (if the cow has so much as a bee sting, the leather isn’t used) to, yarrr,, some plastic. It’s allowing the likes of Emma from next door to own a Kelly. Then again this is probably amazing publicity for a bag? Emma owning the budget bag, an ideal indication that the bona fide bag is for the beguiling and beautiful bag lady. I’ve lost the plot.

However the bottom line remains - I’d love this bag and I think it’s great!

a pause for thought

I’m currently writing two essays AND trying my very hardest to keep on top of current affairs, so that when I’m taking my well deserved 4 hour gossip/coffee break in the Hallward Café, I can avidly discuss who’s next to be hauled into Levenson or whether Germany will in fact ever recruit a president who is more capable in his job than my 10 year old cousin would be.

And it’s exactly in this mix of historical essays and current affairs that things get interesting. Yes, I admit, I have reached that stage of education where I actually find my subject interesting! (To be honest, considering it’s costing me £3,290 a year, I may as well.) Let me explain…

Presentation Work: The Profumo Affair: 1963

-       a British political scandal, where John Profumo, Secretary of State for War had an affair with Christine Keeler, the reputed mistress of an alleged Russian spy. He then denied it in the House of Commons but later admitted to lying and resigned. This was the first time that such a scandal was splattered all over the media and where the traditional British ‘cover up and carry on’ was completely abandoned…government and media conflict…

Essay 1: The Kinsey Reports

-       in the 60s, the American Alfred Kinsey released a couple of ‘sex surveys’ which showed that ‘scandalous’ and ‘unimaginable’ things such as petting and homosexuality were in fact very normal and common! HUGE tabloid coverage and intervention of ‘the establishment’…government and media conflict…

Essay 2: The 1968 Student Movement and generational conflict in West Germany

-       in 1968 the students of West Germany criticized their elders and the government, accusing them of still having fascist tendencies and urging them (through pretty radical methods) to confront this Nazi past and deal with the politics of memory.  There was obviously huge media coverage, but whilst some papers supported the government, others supported the students and some journalists and publishers were arrested…government and media conflict…

Current Affairs: News of the World Scandal

-       no need to elaborate here I feel, but yes, surprise surprise…government and media conflict…

George Orwell once very nicely said: “Each generation imagines itself to be more intelligent than the one that went before it, and wiser than the one that comes after it.”

 Sadly though, I feel that these examples pretty much just highlight that although Joe Bloggs may now read The Guardian on his super sleek iPads, the press mentality is still exactly the same. Just that now I can go and twitter about it.

Oh how Times have changed..?
(sorry)

Hiding behind the internet...

“Hi sexy xxx ” - these were the actual words a complete stranger sent me on Facebook the other day via private message. Upon looking at the ‘info’ on his Profile, I was delighted to discover he was an apparently single sleaze looking for ‘attractive, single girls for…’ (I won’t burden you with it) After I’d obviously deleted the message, WITHOUT responding, I did stop to think.

Why on earth do people think that this is ok?! I put good money on the fact that had I passed this lovely lad in the street, he wouldn’t have even so much as squawked at me, so what gives him the right to do it over the internet?

Another scenario: one of my housemates is one of this years ‘Flirty Thirty’ on ITV’s dating show Take Me Out and I hasten to add puts on by far the best performance. She comes across as genuine, pleasant and good fun and doesn’t once put a foot out of place. Yet still, five minutes into the show #takemoeout is obviously trending on Twitter and, although there are nice comments about her, the majority, are simply unnecessary and ridiculous.

So why do people think that it’s in any shape or form acceptable to hide behind the internet? An ‘online presence’ myself, I like to occasionally twitter my (probably useless) thoughts and ideas to the outside world or get in contact with people via Facebook, and yes it is a way of meeting new people. But surely just because the receiver of your message may not know you or know who you are, does not make it in anyway acceptable to be horrid or simply out of place? You may not be face to face and the other person may not physically see you, but you’re still conversing, so surely conversation conventions apply. I wouldn’t dream of walking up to a random person in the street and telling them their voice is annoying/I fancy them, would they like to…(you get the jist).

Come on guys. Manners apply on the internet as much as on the street.