Look, I was as taken with the Marchesa runway show as the next fashionista – heaven meets historical reference – what's not to love? And for the record, I was also a fan of Ralph Lauren's fall line – how he manages to color inside the lines of the parameters he created and still make it fresh and original after all these years is some sort of modern miracle.
As to the models who display these fashions: It seems pretty pointless to get dragged into the skinny model argument again. Models are skinny. The clothes look good on them... as fashion writer Robin Givhans so adroitly pointed out in a recent Washington Post piece. That's it. And 'twill probably ever be thus till the runways run off into infinity…
Anyway, Fashion Week is over (unless you follow all its European counterparts), so we can stop fretting about it, until September.
But the Sizing – that is another issue. I used to be skinny like that and I do not remember ever buying anything in a size 0.
What does size zero mean?
I mean logically.
If it is actually size ZERO, shouldn't it be invisible?
And what if you are smaller than said Size 0? What is less than size zero?
Do we get into negative-number sizing? Are we into string theory territory? Are size 0 clothes inverted, inside out, upside down, WHAT?
AND. Is that our aspiration, to be a big fat Zero? (Irony noted.)
Here's what: I think we should name our sizes the way we order our coffee (since we've finally memorized how to do that in order to get our fix.)
'Hello, today I'm wearing a solo espresso sheath (who'm I kidding, it's a doppio) under a Venti cable-knit cardigan.'
Didn't fashion originate in Italy anyway?
Maybe I've had too much coffee.