Designers Best for Kids

I’ve been hearing a lot of “Back to School” buzz lately.    “Back to School Shopping Begins in Earnest ”,  “Back to School Season in Full Swing”,   “Shop here for all your  Back to School needs”.

As the  owner of Fierson’s, an upscale children’s clothing boutique in Bronxville, NY, I have to say that  I have seen  “Back to School” shopping  go from “BOOM” to “BUST”.  At one point, not too many years  ago, August was a fairly busy month at the store, while September gross sales often outpaced December holiday sales.  No more.  Those days seem to be gone forever.

In mid and late August the streets in my suburban town are now dead;  affluent customers seem to be staying in their Hamptons homes and out on Nantucket until the last possible second.  There is no mad rush to get a jump on fall shopping.

So, what exactly is all this “Back to School” buzz about?

Surely, it’s not apparel.

This shopping frenzy supposedly taking place may  be related to backpacks, school supplies and possibly new sneakers, but it’s certainly no longer about clothes.

When I was growing up, setting aside a week in August for back to school shopping with Mom was de rigueur:  A rite of passage, something that was as familiar as Fourth of July Fireworks and the annual Labor Day barbeque.

In fact, when hard-pressed, I’m sure I can still pull out old photo albums to gaze at the slightly faded photos of my sisters and me posing in our “first day of school” outfits.  Funny;  it doesn’t SEEM so long ago and yet, it, in retrospect,  is clearly both a world and era away.

Okay, if the truth be told, it WAS  back when kids still carried lunch boxes and covered  text books in that brown grocery bag kraft paper…it WAS a different period, but not the paleolithic one our children envision it to be.

Today, with fewer and fewer shoppers  coming in for that special first day of school outfit, I have to ask: are we taking away some of the “specialness” of this big day??  If kids are simply dressed in their left-over camping attire, are we giving them a subtle message that embarking on their first day of school in a new class, with a new teacher and possibly new school  is nothing special?  Nothing of  note,  nothing to make a special effort for?

Are there long-term implications here?

If girls go to their first day of school in their well-worn  jeans and ubiquitous UGGS  and boys in their cargo shorts and camp-appropriate tees, are we inadvertently sending a message that the status quo is acceptable?  No need to strive, to make an impression, to make your mark??

Is the first day of school no longer special?  No longer something that is anxiously anticipated?  Will pictures NOT be taken?  Will text books NOT be covered, bangs NOT  be trimmed?

As with holidays and other special occasions, there has been a tendency of late to take the “special” out and keep the regular and routine in.

In this bloggers humble opinion, we are doing ourselves and our children a huge disservice here.  My recommendation?  Make days, holidays, first day of school, special days…”special” – special in terms of both, our actions AND our attire.

Back to School shopping needs to mean more than a half hour trip to Staples for composition books and calculators.  Like a fresh coat of paint on the auditorium walls, new soccer balls in the gym, our kids should also put their best foot forward — in looks and deed.

From a Fabsugar.com “ August 8, 2012 blog on Classic Back to School Clothes we take note: “We have fond memories of slipping into penny loafers and pleats back in the day. Oddly enough, the same polished trends took shape on the runways for Fall ’12, giving the school dress code a designer makeover. We may not be headed back to class, but we’re living vicariously through a wardrobe of collegiate-inspired wares”.

So go shopping!!

It will not only help boost the economy, but most likely boost our children’s self-esteem and possibly their grades.  At a time when the U.S.  educational  system ranks well below that of  South Korea, Finland and a host of industrialized nations,  we need all the help we can get.

I am, at the moment, sweltering in the heat of land-locked Madrid.  It is a glorious, imposing, diverse and exciting city, but definitely a HOT city.   Particularly in July.  So, why do I choose to sweat it out in the hot Spanish sun?

As stated in last post,  (Part I of “The Finer points of European Children’s Style) ,  I make the trek to Europe in the heat of the summer to buy what I deem to be superior clothing for my store, Fiersons, in Bronxville, NY and for my websites,  DesignersBestForKids.com and Fiersons.com.

This week’s blog is, in effect, a continuation, or rather an expansion on some of the reasons I tend to prefer a European aesthetic.  I deem clothing from overseas to be decidedly “superior” to its stateside counterparts because the European’s can proudly claim the following accomplishments:

1. The French do “whimsical” without screaming “juvenile” and “over the top”.

French brands like Lili Gaufrette and Tartine et Chocolat are well known for their adept use of whimsical embellishments that add a touch of fancy fun to otherwise, somewhat staid and classic items. This touch of whimsy is seemingly perfect in its execution; not too much –not too little – just the right amount. There’s no garish screen print of “Sponge Bob” or the latest bejeweled Disney princess. There is an understated elegance,  and sophistication, despite the fanciful touches.

 

2. The Italians can add bauble and adornments without making the look seem cheap.

I’ve seen this time and time again.  It is evident  in brands like Monnalisa, Val & Max and many others – fashion forward brands that do” trendy” styles without veering into the “tacky” realm.  I don’t exactly know how they do it.  Perhaps it is the quality of the individual items used in the ornamentation, or more likely, it is their unerring sense of style; the impeccable Italian taste level that permeates everything from their food, and fine arts to their fashion. The fact of the matter is that no matter how many embellishments – the net effect rarely looks cheap.  When the look is copied however, the top or dress looks like something you’d buy at the 99 cent store.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3. The quality of the fabrics is superior.

Whether it is the wonderful cotton piques of Spain or the Merino Wools of Italy, the European fabrics are unparalled.  You can feel the difference.  You can see the difference.  The clothes hang better, are softer to the touch, have a subtle sheen as opposed to a more crass shine.  The fabrics stand up to intricate tailoring and embellishments.  You know, intuitively and at first glance, that the item in question is not something you’d see at Kohl’s or Target.  It is superior in a subtle, but significant way.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4. They know that not everything has to be rendered in Knit Jersey.

Perhaps it started with the bona-fide trend of athletic attire being worn everywhere?   Perhaps the “Snuggly” exacerbated it, but there is a tendency for American clothing to be made to be super comfortable.  This results in a preponderance of articles made in soft, stretchy knit jersey.  While I will be the first to admit that I LIKE knit jersey – when traveling, when going to Costco on a Saturday morning — I don’t wear it EXCLUSIVELY.   Children need NOT be super comfy all the time; they’re children, they’ll adapt.  The Europeans put them in piques, linens, silks, wools to apparent, little or no ill effect.  Let’s follow suit.

For all of the above reasons, I will continue to buy European styles until either the dollar takes a nose-dive or American styles can compete in terms of both design aesthetic and construction.   I shall fervently hope for the latter.

 

 

Fierson’s, my children’s store in Bronxville, is well-known for carrying upscale American and European lines.  Many customers frequent the boutique or websites (particularly Designersbestforkids.com) to buy the assortment of high end European clothing from designer brands like Catimini ,Monnalisa and Lili Gaufrette found both in the store and on the websites.  Consequently, I have a veritable obligation each year (TWICE a year actually) to head overseas to buy what I deem to be the best of the European lines for the coming season.

That time is now here.  Traveling to the sticky, smog-ridden Po Valley and Spain’s steaming Andalusian skies in the heat of July, is neither particularly fun nor glamorous.  And yet, I consistently do it.  Why?

The short answer:  It is the style.   It is always, always– irretrievably and irrevocably — about the style.  About the clothes.

There are, in the modern age of an increasingly shrinking global world, STILL significant differences in European vs. American style.

It is these differences that, for me, provide the continued allure of the European aesthetic.

1. Items are not overly long.

I like, no, LOVE, the look of short skirts, short shorts, and short dresses on short people.  Everything is in balance.  The stars are aligned.

Frankly, I have never been able to quite understand why little boys parade around in shorts that are so long they can barely walk.  In addition to looking downright stupid, the look seems to create a physical hazard in terms of walking?!   At an age when many tots are just learning to walk…why complicate things by having these little ones fight voluminous fabric at the knees?

Bathing suits and shorts should be above the knee.  In Europe, they invariably are.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dresses and skirts on little girls similarly don’t overwhelm little bodies when kept short. Both shift dresses and dresses with full, gathered waists simply look better when in proportion to the petite frames of little girls. Leave the long dresses to the sister wives in Utah.  Children should be in short, sweet skirts.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2. European clothes tend to fit.

Despite the precarious financial condition of many European countries, they have not yet fallen into the singularly American tactic of trying to economize by”buying for the future”.  Let’s be clear: Trying to get two or three seasons out of one outfit NEVER really works.  The problem is that, until the child grows into the item, there is a significant chunk of time during which the article is just way too big and looks it.  There’s really no way of camouflaging oversized, droopy duds. So, is a purchase worth it, if it will be ill-fitting for the entire first season in which it is worn?

When parents try to get two or three years out of one article of clothing, their children end up, for a significant part of that period, looking like refugees from Herzegovina.  Is that what we are going after?  Make sure clothes fit.  Check the shoulders, under the arms, the back and waist before letting your little one go out on the town.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3. They don’t over-stylize.

I see it all the time. There is a tendency in the States to try to be uber-hip, uber-cool, uber-fashionable.  Consequently, both editorial and runway looks scream “trying too hard”.  Trying too hard to be outrageous, trying too hard to get noticed, trying too hard to scramble to the top of the fashion heap.

The Europeans are a bit more laid back and thus, infinitely more successful in achieving stylish looks that retain some semblance of understatement.   The looks are STILL hip, STILL stylized but, ultimately, more chic.

Simonetta, one of my favorite Italian lines, knows how to create layers that never look too overdone, too haphazard.  As shown below, their typical looks can be super-layered and very stylish, but always, at their core, share a common thread:  refinement reigns supreme.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4. Europeans don’t try to transform their children into animals and/or assorted caricatures.

Our counterparts abroad have earned my undying gratitude for their reluctance to turn their children into stuffed animals and fairy creatures.  Children in France and Spain are NOT being morphed into bumble bees and fuzzy bears.  In Italy, mothers wrap their just-bathed babies in luxurious, embroidered towels, NOT towels with an assortment of ears, dragon tails and flower petals.  Metamorphosis is for caterpillars, not kids.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Try as I might, I cannot find evidence of European children walking around with angel wings, tutus, and furry ears.  They are who they are…cute, adorable babies.  Parents on the other side of the Atlantic seem to know instinctively that THAT is enough.  There is no compulsion to try to up the “cute” factor.

European children actually wear clothes, not costumes.

I am out of step.  Out of step and hopelessly lost.  There appears to be an array of people dancing to a tune I neither particularly like, nor understand.  The tune is shrill and grating; akin to a seriously “pitchy”  American Idol contestant singing “The Greatest Love of All”.

As the owner of Fierson’s, an upscale children’s boutique known for selling tasteful, high-quality goods, I look around and wonder: is anyone buying them anymore??  And…when they do buy them…where exactly are they wearing these gorgeous clothes?  Since I see little evidence of anyone really looking good these days?

At Designersbestforkids.com, there are beautiful, simply stunning party dresses from MonnaLisa, an Italian luxury brand and from Spanish brands like Luli and Me and Torres.  All elegant, all of superior quality.  Dresses with embroidered flowers and smocked dresses, any of which would be perfect for the rash of communion, christening and graduation parties now in full swing. 

And yet, when I go to an assortment of these functions and look around, these quality goods are nowhere in sight.  Instead, I simply see a host of  cheap imitations, cheesy party dresses that you just know were the season’s $29.99 specials at Kohls and Macys. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The difference in looks is striking.  It is obvious.  Can no one see it?

The little girls running around at these parties, sitting in rapt attention in front of the requisite magician all look vaguely familiar: like real-life versions of their “Made in China” dolls in their miniature party dresses.  The ubiquitous polyester party dresses are made of inferior fabrics, generic in style with usually a plain bodice, satin or sateen sash and full polyester skirt, usually with a floral pattern or adorned with those cheap-looking flowers you would see on the overly-decorated frames at the Dollar Store.

Since when did this become good enough?  How is it that inferior–looking goods are now acceptable at even the fanciest of functions.  While price IS a factor, I for one, would rather wait until a superior item goes on sale and buy just one really good item as opposed to three mediocre ones.

But really, it’s not only about price. These parents are the same ones spending  significant sums of money at over-the-top restaurants where gargantuan portions are the norm.  They are the same people spending even bigger sums of money on ever-larger televisions and home theater equipment.

So, it’s really not about money.  It’s more, in my opinion, about a cheap, cheesy look that has not only become acceptable, but worse: popular.

For parents and older siblings, this trend towards cheap takes a different tact…it seems to me that the majority of young teenagers and their moms get gussied up in outfits that are both, too tight and too revealing.

Are they TRYING to look like Snooki?  Do they think the too tight, and much too short, ruched polyester skirts riding far too high up on thick thighs, with belly and butt protruding noticeably, is in any way appealing?  And to whom would that look appeal??

The polyester and spandex combination fabrics pervasive today seem to be lend themselves to this “trashy is better” look immortalized by reality TV starts from New Jersey.

Are we really trying to emulate them?

A disclaimer here: my distaste for this has NOTHING to do with any notion of “good girls” vs. bad..or any moral judgments on my part.  I actually abhor the self-righteous moral majority types and tend to be VERY liberal in terms of family and sexual lifestyles. So, really, my distaste has nothing to do with sexual mores. 

It is simply a question of aesthetics.

Why are we choosing cheap and tacky over classy and elegant? 

For children, why are we looking to the toddlers on Tantrums and Tiaras or Suri Cruise in heels at three versus the grandchildren of Vice President Joe Biden (whatever your politics, those kids are dressed well!) or European notables?  For parents, why are we lauding laughable characters from New Jersey (Mob wives, Housewives of New Jersey), as opposed to style icons like Audrey Hepburn, Cate Blanchette and Angelina Jolie who, has transformed from Goth girl to an impeccably tailored, classy style icon.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

For our sakes as well as our children’s…let’s collectively raise the bar.

Four stores in my town closed last week.

Not one, not two, not three, but four.  In one day.

The town is not found in one of Pennsylvania’s old steel-mining areas.  Nor is it found in the automobile-reliant suburbs of Detroit.  In fact, it is not any of the towns that might first come to mind when watching news reports of decimated Main Streets across the county.  It is, instead, found in an extremely affluent area of Westchester.  The town is, in fact, Bronxville;  a well-known bedroom community 20 minutes north of Manhattan.  A town replete with stately homes along gorgeous, tree-lined drives.  Bronxville is a village that is chock full of investment bankers and white-collar professionals who have made their mark (and their millions) in some of the most glamorous professions in the world; finance, publishing, media and entertainment.

So what exactly IS the problem?  If it is so difficult for small business owners to succeed in the rarified, tony town of Bronxville, how hard must it be for others in less-privileged environs?  What are the prospects for small businesses across other, less affluent, areas of the country?.

 

While I am certainly UNqualified to answer the question in terms of any economic theories or data, as the owner of Fierson’s, a children’s boutique that has been an integral part of the Bronxville community for over 65 years, I feel moderately qualified to speak to the issue from my personal observations and gut instincts.  My store is a destination store and having been around for such a long time, I have a very large and loyal following, so am somewhat insulated from the small business carnage taking place around me.  Still, I AM very concerned for other small business owners in not only Bronxville, but in towns and villages across the country.

My gut instincts tell me that, YES, the internet is a significant factor.   While Internet sales are consistently up year over year, sales at brick and mortar stores have declined. Retail stores MUST get onto the e-commerce bandwagon if they are to thrive, or even, survive.  I have had two successful websites for some time, (designersbestforkids.com and fiersons.com) and can attest to the fact that they demand an inordinate amount of time and effort.  Many Mom & Pop stores just don’t have either the knowledge or  time to put up and manage their own websites and are, thus, getting a smaller share of the market.

I get it.  But my personal observation is that the struggles small businesses are encountering  can’t ALL be attributed to the Internet.  Small Business in this country is not merely wounded, it is hemorrhaging.

As an explicit sign of the times, American Express, never known to be particularly friendly  to small businesses, (their merchant fees are significantly higher than other cards) has recently established “Small Business Saturday”.  While the company has noticed the extent of the suffering, we small businesses  feel it and live it.  We NEED consumers to return to small business, and not just on one Saturday a year.

And yet, every time I turn on morning TV, I see Matt Lauer interviewing some money guru or self-proclaimed budget expert  who proceeds to tell viewers how to get the best “deal” possible, business owners be damned.  Whether they are going on about how to go to the big box stores and decipher the codes at Costco, or  how to  wait it out to make sure you get the highest possible reduction on your Christmas purchases, it is always ALWAYS about how to squeeze every penny out of the merchants.  These merchants are more often than not store owners  who are barely surviving.

With profit margins already low, and most small business owners struggling, I have to wonder if these gurus and experts are thinking about the long term implications of their advice.  With stores in towns across the country closing, main streets become ghost towns, sales tax revenues go down and property taxes go up.  With no viable downtown area, home values are negatively impacted and REAL loss is then experienced by those very same viewers who were initially and ostensibly trying to save a buck.

It doesn’t stop there:  One money guru even had the brilliant idea to ask stores for a discount for cash.  Who exactly are they targeting here?  Certainly not the big department stores since no one would be likely to ask a 16-year-old sales associate for a cash discount.  The inference is to ask the small business owner for a cash discount.   What is that saying exactly?  Does a cash discount refer to only the 2% charge card fees, or something more, to perhaps take into account the sales tax? WHAT exactly are they espousing?

Follow this up with Ann Curry doing a segment on head to toe outfits that can be had for under $59.00 or $99.00 or whatever.  Now, if the consumer can buy a blouse for 14.99, pants for 29.99 etc., that means that the store owner is paying a little less than half of that.  So, if this is the scenario, then how much is the young girl who is   slaving over a sewing machine in a hot, humid factory making a day? 5 dollars??

 

Does that bother you?  It should.

And then there is Al Roker telling viewers that it’s going to be rainy day, and advising them that if they don’t have to go out, then they should stay home.  What???  IT is RAIN.  Are we in the land of the yellow-brick road?  Will we melt??

 

Too often, the media is always looking for the “dramatic”, the BIG story.  Consequently, every ½ inch snowstorm becomes a “Storm Watch” event  and rain becomes an excuse to stay home and stay “SAFE”.

Dramatic? Yes.

In a time when melodrama reigns, again, I get it.

But, it is also extremely short-sighted.  Are these on air network notables thinking about what those statements actually DO to businesses across the country?

I suggest they forgo the drama for a little bit and look at the long term impact of their segments.

I see it all the time.

As a store owner of Fierson’s an upscale children’s boutique in Bronxville, NY,  I bear  witness to the disturbing trend I see among parents who eagerly ask their children (who are at an age when they can barely string together three or four words, much less offer a cogent opinion) if they “like” a certain outfit being considered for purchase.

I don’t say much, but I want to scream.  I mean, I’m not even so sure it’s a good idea to ask our husbands’ THEIR opinions on clothing much less our toddlers?!!

While I was certifiably mad for my late husband, he could not, under any circumstances, be viewed as a style maven or arbiter of good taste.  In this blogger’s humble opinion, MOST men ( read: “straight” men) are NOT style icons, nor do they want to be.  Why then, would I ask him his opinion about clothes?  (Whether they be mine or others.)

So why the recent compulsion to ask our children ??

Do they have a highly developed sense of style at two? Or are we merely placing on them a responsibility that they may not even be interested in assuming?

A recent article in The Washington Post pointed to a Connecticut-based survey that found that parents  often  “asked kids’ opinions, regardless of age, about products they planned to buy for the kids or whole family. More, it found that about half sought kids opinions about products the parents wanted for themselves.”

Say WHAT?

Why are we doing this?  To teach them independence?   To let them express their individual sense of style?  Style is learned over time.  Yes.  Let’s let our toddlers develop it.   Uhmmm…on their American Girl dolls.   Not on an outfit they’re going to wear to Sally’s birthday party or Uncle Nick’s first Thanksgiving.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I’m all for asking toddlers key questions:

• Ask them if they want to go potty.
• Ask them if those were the puka shells in the bowl on the coffee table or the sweetie candies next to it that they just swallowed.
• Ask them if they’d like to start reciting the alphabet or the names of all fifty states.

But DON’T ask them if they “like” or (even worse)  will “wear” a certain outfit.

Who’s in charge here?  Who is the parent??

Did Jackie Kennedy ask John John if he would wear that short double breasted coat he wore when saluting his father’s casket at the funeral??  I’d hazard a guess that she did not.

Did he grow up to be an indecisive,  insecure man who was unsure of his sense of style and sense of self? I think not.

What would have happened had John F. Kennedy Jr. had his say on that fateful day?  Would millions of teary-eyed Americans be watching a young boy in a collarless T-shirt emblazoned with the reigning cartoon characters of that time (I think George Jetson and his dog Elmo may have been right up there in popularity in 1963).

Would the solemnity of the occasion have been appropriately conveyed via the caricatures or would something  be askew?

Children will learn to make their own decisions in time…why rush it?  American children don’t get to vote until they are 18 and with good reason.  Not to put words into the mouths of our founding fathers, but  I’d have to say that these esteemed gentlemen simply realized, that with  time, experience and maturity, our children will be in a better position to make reasoned choices.

So then, is it really necessary to give our children voting and veto power on clothing at two?

If it were up to our two year olds they’d be wearing their Pink-alicious PJ’s to great aunt Polly’s wake.

Just as a child will go for the Fruit loops over the steel cut oats, the gummy bears over the apple slices, so too, will they opt for the cheap and flashy over the simple and refined.  A Disney character will always beat out a cotton pique sundress or Brooks Brothers blue and white oxford shirt.  That understood, do we really want or need to give our young children this much control?  Who says they have to get a say in every aspect of their life?

Do our children have a say about brushing their teeth?  About combing their hair? About saying “please” and “thank you” at appropriate times?

No.  Why is that?  Because they need to learn,  to be taught about decorum;  both in terms of behavior and appearance.  Similarly, they need to be taught about appropriate clothing choices.  Let them evolve into their own individual style…in time, and through a parent’s guidance.

For parents who insist on giving their young children some power, my advice is:  If you MUST, then PLEASE  make sure it is LIMITED in scope.  If fascism on a personal level doesn’t appeal to you quite as much as it does to me and you feel that you MUST give them some input,  then give them a choice, a choice between two options.  Two items that YOU, as the parent in charge,  have  already selected.

 

 

 

 

 

 

It’s about baby steps.  Give them input as they mature. Give them an option of A or B if you must, but not carte blanche.  You be the parent.  Let them be the child.

 

I recently spent a weekend in Florida visiting family.  During this brief stay, I found myself frequently bringing up “unintended consequences” with my sister, who writes a blog for the Huffington Post and with whom I share a similar point of view on things significant and insignificant.

After we had initially discussed  this idea of  “unintended consequences” , we kept looking differently at all manner of things that weekend;  suddenly seeing each as being yet another manifestation of  this concept of unintended consequences.

For example, what of the preponderance of those motorized scooters cropping up in malls and theme parks around the country?

Now, while there are certainly riders who are truly infirmed and immobile – we, cynical cosmopolitan women that we are, couldn’t help but feel that most of those zipping around in these carts are simply overweight.   Let’s not sugar coat it (pun intended), they are clinically, and morbidly, obese.  Bad hips, bad knees, shortness of breath, all symptoms of morbid obesity.   We had to ponder the unintended consequence here.  Conceivably, these aging baby boomers are getting these scooters because it is difficult for them to get around via more conventional means and these motorized scooters theoretically increase their mobility.

It begs the question however: Isn’t the unintended consequence here ultimately INCREASED weight and thus, DECREASED mobility??

Another observation wryly noted while we were in our respective dressing rooms trying on one knit or stretchy pant after another:  women today rarely wear pants with a true waist band. (If the truth be told, I must admit that I too, am one of these women.  My mother would be horrified..but, in terms of opting for a stretchy knit over an unyielding, lined, fitted pant, I sadly stand:  GUILTY AS CHARGED)   In what is surely a sign of the times, MOST women I know do prefer leggings and unrestrictive tunic tops or knit pants to fashionable  cotton twill or wool gabardine ones.   Who wouldn’t?  But what exactly are we sacrificing?  What is the unintended consequence of this preference?

Don’t these stretchy pants and flowing tops effectively make it easier for us to go hog   wild?  To eat without the inconvenient (but effective) looming threat of not being able to button our pants once we get up from the table?  Doesn’t this “get out of jail free card” then help to pave the way for an increasingly expanding waistline? (At which point, unrestrictive clothing becomes a virtual necessity.  The cycle then not only continues, it uhmmmm…. expands.   (pun, again, intended).

Have you been to the Midwest?  While I try not to make a habit of it, on my rare forays into that part of the country,  I  can’t help but notice that the population is increasingly obese.  Is it mere coincidence that there’s not a proper waistband to be found?!  It’s all pastel stretchy pants and velour track suits?!  Is rabid obesity just yet another unintended consequence of this far too comfortable clothing we insist on wearing?  You be the judge…or better yet, just spend a day at the Missouri State Fair.

So, what then is the unintended consequence of consistently clothing our children almost exclusively in stretchy knit, uber-comfortable clothing?

As a retailer (I own Fierson’s in Bronxville and two websites, fiersons.com and DesignersBestForKids.com), I often hear shoppers ask whether or not I have any other super- comfy clothes for their children to play in. Along with this initial request, there are numerous additional conditions that are expected to be met:  it must be easy on, easy off, no zippers, no turtlenecks, no buttons on pants if possible and certainly nothing that requires ironing.

Variations on the same, boring theme…

 

 

Are the retailers and manufacturers then left with very many options?  Is this a way of explaining the endless assortment of flowy tops and leggings?  Perhaps that helps explain why the colors are becoming so garish and costumey….the manufacturers are trying to differentiate something that is hard to differentiate given the ever increasing limitations put on childrenswear by kids and Moms alike.  There is no “design” aesthetic with these comfy outfits, they are just the same pattern repeated ad nauseum.

Is it imperative that we be quite so accommodating? Do we really need to make things this  easy for our kids?

What is the unintended consequence here?

Are we in fact limiting our children?  Shrinking their options and, thus their world?  We may think we are doing them a favor, but could we, in fact be doing them a disservice?

What will they do when they need to put on a suit for an interview?  Or a shirt with an actual collar? Will your child refuse to put on a smocked pique dress at Easter?  Or a red velvet dress at Christmas, opting instead for a candy pink Juicy Couture track suit  for Christmas Dinner at Aunt Marjorie’s?  Are we setting it up so everything will be too much of an effort for our children?

Why are kids today so sensitive to collars?  Anything that “itches” or is slightly restrictive is suddenly a problem?  When I was a child, (not sooo long ago) we played in starched pinafores.  We rode bikes in dresses with Peter Pan collars and full slips.  We didn’t have “sensory” issues.  Is this newfound “skin sensitivity”  a sign of the continuing  evolution of our species, or merely just coddling?

To parents and children alike, I, as a retailer who longs to see American kids in more of the traditional clothing commonplace in Europe, want to scream:  Buck up!

Let your children adjust.  If they can’t adjust to wearing regular clothing, how can we ever expect them to excel in school when it gets a little challenging, or land that really hard job, or tackle Mt. Everest.  The world is not always soft, not always fuzzy, not always comfortable.   Their wardrobe shouldn’t be either.

Be careful.  There are, after all, unintended consequences ahead.

To veil or not to veil?   That is the question: Whether ’tis nobler……

Okay..okay…you get it.  Perhaps not as pressing as the precise question posed by Hamlet,  it is, nevertheless an oft-heard inquiry that speaks to the quandary many mothers and daughters find themselves in at this time of year.

For those of you new to these blogs, I am the owner of Fierson’s in Bronxville, an upscale children’s boutique known  for selling, (among other types of children’s clothing) simple, understated First Communion dresses.  In the capacity of retail “expert” and  with communion season rapidly approaching,  I’m often asked this very question by otherwise ultra-sophisticated, well-educated  Manhattan and Westchester mothers alike.

Regardless of the dress selected, they invariably want to know whether or not their daughters should wear a veil as part of their First Communion ensemble.

At Fierson’s,  I would say the ratio of veil wearers to “headband only” wearers is about 40/60, with forty percent opting for veils, while about sixty percent choose either a simple wreath of fresh flowers or an elegant  headband.

A disclaimer here:  that ratio may not accurately reflect what is going on in other communities.

Fierson’s, by virtue of its location and proximity to Manhattan, holds a very unique position.   In operation for over 65 years, the boutique is a virtual institution in the tony and rather rarified town of Bronxville, (a picturesque enclave of investment banker types that lies about 25 minutes north of Manhattan).   My store caters to a clientele that likes the elegant simplicity of clean lines and classic styles.  While I’d hazard a guess that the town is predominantly Catholic, the aesthetic is preternaturally “WASPY”.

It is an aesthetic that suits my personal tastes well.   Another disclaimer:  I  was born and bred in Connecticut and am forever stuck with, (for better or worse) an “understated” sensibility.  As such, I prefer a fresh-flower wreath or headband to veil.

I can however, see the merits of both and tend to offer my advice based on a combination of factors;

• the congregation in which the girl will be receiving First Communion
• the style of the dress selected and….
•  the unspoken clues I’m picking up from both mother and daughter during the all-important selection process.

As a general rule, I tend to opt for headbands over veils, but will suggest a veil if the dress is very simple and may need the veil to take it up a notch to fully achieve a  “First Communion”  look.  For example, when looking at two of our bestselling  communion dresses (fiersons.com and designersbestforkids .com), the simple “Sabrina” style dress on the left works well with a veil, while I prefer the slightly more embellished dress on the right with just a pearl studded headband.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

For me, the veil CAN work PROVIDED it is:

• kept short, (just below the shoulders max),
• of substantial heft and good quality
• free of any sparkles, sequins or other forms of dubious ornamentation.

So, basically, keep it simple.  Let the quality stand out and don’t do a veil that detracts from the child OR the dress.  And…this SHOULD go without saying, but….. tiaras should be NOWHERE in sight.

Leave the tiara’s for dress up, or… for Teresa Giudice’s daughters on the Housewives of New Jersey.  Tiaras do NOT belong on a young girl unless that young girl is Elizabeth Regina at the occasion of her Coronation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(And…don’t get me started on heels….ballet flats or modified Mary Janes are best to keep the look refined and age-appropriate).

But, back to the question of veils.  In my experience…certain nationalities and/or faiths tend to go one way or the other.   Italian mothers (if we’re talking nationalities) who come into the store are more likely to opt for the veil,  whereas Lutheran’s, (if we’re talking religious affiliation),   for whom the occasion is more low key, tend to prefer headbands.  Clearly, there is no hard and fast rule, which makes the whole process a more trying one.

At the risk of sounding repetitive, I will say it again, if you ARE going to do a veil: Keep it simple. One of my favorite looks is a simple “Jackie” bow  from Andrea’s Beau, a supplier I look to (almost exclusively) for the communion headbands and veils we sell at Fiersons.  As with all of their headbands and veils, the quality is exceptional and the weight and feel of the tulle is superior to many others on the market.

 

Mom’s don’t want their daughters to be the only one without a veil.  Nor do they want them to be the only one wearing a veil.  At an age when young girls are struggling with insecurities and have yet to develop their own sense of self- worth, conformity is king.  So, of course, no one wants their child to stand out.  (stand out in a bad way that is…as in…”like a sore thumb”).

So, my advice:

If you don’t feel compelled to have your daughter wear a veil for religious reasons, and if the church does not mandate a veil,  then skip the veil altogether.

If most of the other girls ARE wearing veils, and you don’t want your daughter to be one of the few “veil-less wonders”,  then choose a  simple one with a simple hairstyle. (No need for a hairstyle done up in tightly-wound ringlets –  it’s not a prom, it’s a first communion).

If you are unsure of what the other girls are wearing, select one of those veils that can be positioned under a headband.  Once you get to the church, survey the crowd.  If very few of the girls are wearing veils, you can easily whip off the veil and no one will be the wiser.

So now, with that settled, in the words of many a priest: “Peace be with you….”