More gooseberries on the garden fence. They are very pretty, aren't they? Like little green hanging lanterns.
Here's a friend we discovered on the front porch the other day:
These little skinks are also so pretty, with their racing stripes and their long blue tails. I see them all the time, flicking under rocks and bricks in the garden when I come outside, part of the enormous, largely unseen life web carrying on its business all around me.
Last night we had supper on the front porch for the first time this year. The sun was down enough that it wasn't blazing right in on us --- the only thing I miss about the big front-yard oak tree we took down some years ago now is the evening shade. Of course, in the trade I got a sun garden, with the peonies that are blooming away out there right now, so on the whole I'm not complaining. Anyway, it was nice to sit watching the evening fall and the birds venture out on the grass. And then it was nice to plunge back into the cool house and the smell of the dinner I'd just cooked, which to me is a very particular summer experience, remembered from childhood: outdoors in the long warm evening, then into the cool house and the lingering good smells of whatever had been for dinner.
Today: the usual, with a side order of groceries. MUST remember to include coffee. I keep forgetting.
Wearing today:
*Wool& Brooklyn dress (S/Long) in Pacific, bought May 2023
*Secondhand Birkenstock Mayaris, bought April 2024
Wet hair again, because I've had a little flare-up of dermatitis on my scalp, so am shampooing more often with my Head&Shoulders Bare. This is just shampoo, no conditioners or stylers today, to see whether that makes a difference in how my scalp responds. I'll probably clip it up off my neck once it's dry --- since I do have this whole wardrobe of claw clips and scrunchies and might as well wear them.
I do so love this dress. It's easy to wear and looks like a million bucks just as it comes. Last time I wore it was on the plane home from Dallas 15 days ago, so its turn has come again. I just really don't tire of this style: adaptable for winter with boots and cardigans, marvelous with nothing but sandals. When the time comes to buy a new dress, another Brooklyn is at the top of my list. This dress, and very likely my Beetroot one as well, will definitely feature in my travel capsule for our second trip to Norway this June (here, for grins and giggles, is last year's capsule). These dresses layer well if the weather's suboptimal, but are flattering and comfortable on their own in all kinds of circumstances.
I could go down a whole rabbit hole of travel planning and mental packing, but I shall resist for now. I learned a lot last year: chiefly, don't take big bulky hiking boots if you don't want to wear them on the plane. I did break down and buy a secondhand pair of Xero Mesa trail runners to take instead of my Oswegos, because we really do want to do a lot more hiking this year than we did last year, and the Mesas have a heavier tread on the sole, which I think will be better in the mountains around Åndalsnes, where we plan to spend more time this year. BUT these will pack down a lot more easily than my leather Birk hiking boots did, and are slim and cute enough that I could wear them in the cities if I wanted.
I have also bought my husband a Smartwool long-sleeved base-layer tee, which I hope he'll like. He does love these wool tees in general and has worn and worn a long-sleeved merino shirt he bought at a Devolt outlet in Norway last year. This shirt is a bright blue micro-stripe, and if he doesn't wear it, I will. But I think he'll like it --- he does like and look good in blue.
Anyway, I said I wasn't going down this Norway rabbit hole, and here I just about am.
By the way, if you're on Twitter and not following Derek Guy, may I recommend his commentary on menswear? Any woman with a man in her life really should know, or begin to learn, something about menswear, because nine men out of ten do not know how to dress themselves (I mean, they can tie their shoes and all that, but they don't know what shoes to wear). Also, Derek Guy is just entertaining: witness his smoking-hot takedown of one of the noxious T*tes the other day (and if you don't know who these other men are, don't worry, you're not missing a thing).
BUT ALSO: What he has to say about clothing shapes and silhouettes, and how they really don't have anything to do with body shape, is absolutely transferable to women's clothing as well. Rather than focusing on what an article of clothing "does" or does not "do" for a given body, which for us generally means show off the body's own shape (for good or ill), he talks in terms of shape and drape. For him, the clothes themselves become an entity in space, rather than as an accessory to the body, the real spatial entity.
So, for example, a heavier man can actually look a lot better in his clothes than a buff one, if the heavier man knows how to choose clothes as clothes. I personally find his example here far, far, FAR more attractive, as a man, than any of the bodybuilder dudes in tight suits. Like, in a crowded room, my eye would go to this man and, virtuous Catholic married lady that I am, I would think, HMMM. That's all I would do, because (see virtuous Catholic married lady, above), but you know, I like men a lot, and I find a lot of men very attractive. You know what I don't find attractive, though? Dudes who unironically use words like mid to describe women's attractiveness while wearing suits that don't fit them because they somehow think this is studly. I guess what I'm really saying is that I dislike stupid, narcissistic, actively unpleasant men. But I'm also saying that I find many larger, less-fit men unambiguously attractive, as in way more attractive than your standard prettyboy, and that I'm really apt to find a man attractive if he dresses well. Taste and intelligence are frankly sexy.
BUT ALSO (again), this is applicable to women. Granted, it can be a lot harder to find really nice clothing in very large sizes, because many good brands, for whatever reason, don't practice as much "size inclusivity" as they might. But I have personally thought, as a passing observation, that a larger woman wearing something good and interesting, with nice lines and drape and good fabric, is always going to look way, WAY better and more attractive and classy than a skinny girl in a bodycon dress. Every time. I'm not attracted to women sexually, but I do notice women's attractiveness, and I think the same principle applies as to men: shape and drape wins over body shape, every time. Taste and intelligence are always in style.
And that's why Ashley here shouldn't worry about belting her very vintagey-vibing dress. The line and flow of this dress are so beautiful and fluid. To belt it would disturb that beautiful line --- would disrupt the shape and drape. And the great thing about a dress like this is that yes, it looks good on Ashley who's a runner and dancer and quite lithe, but it would look good on a much heavier woman, too (as long as she didn't feel she had to put a belt on to accentuate her waist). It's just such a feminine, flowy, lovely dress, and whether it "flatters the body" or not is completely beside the point.
ETA: WHY would this dress flatter in any size?
*Beautiful color
*Fluid fabric: not stiff or ultra-structured
*Look at the proportions:
--the relatively high waistline (albeit loose and just basically a seam in front), with a long skirt, for a 1/3:2/3 balance
---the pretty collar detail draws the eye up and frames the face nicely
---the vertical line of the buttons both creates interest and, for lack of a better word, verticality --- it's elongating, I guess is what I'm trying to say
*the whole design is intended to evoke the sense of a particular era (1920s/30s) and setting (garden party, maybe?), rather than to display the body, which can move around unrestrainedly in the dress without any worry about wardrobe malfunction or clinging or riding up or whatever.
I actually think the larger principles are true of the dress I'm wearing today, too, even though it has a waist. It just has a lovely silhouette and details and drape, and I have seen women a hundred or more pounds heavier than I am wear this style and look beautiful in it --- because it's a beautiful dress.
Anyway, I think those are the important considerations: the line (aka shape and drape) and the vibe (the mood or energy or era or whatever it is you might want to invoke in your clothing). Well, and color, because good colors for your coloring never go amiss. But in choosing this dress today, for example, I wasn't thinking, How does this make my body look? I was thinking, Hm, a little 1940s vibe. Easy to move around in. Looks just as good with Birks as with dressier shoes. Vintage but also sort of outdoorsy . . . and this color always makes me feel good. I was thinking about shape: the crossover bodice, the flare of the skirt, and how fun this swishy skirt feels. I was thinking about being cool and comfortable all day long.
And I do feel good in what I'm wearing. Would somebody's eyes go to me in a crowded room? Well, I know one person whose eyes would always seek me out, and truly, that is enough. AND truly, this dress would do it for him.
LATER:
So far today I have
*mailed out the pair of jeans I sold on Poshmark
*ordered groceries
*done some extensive editing and uploading of a guest column for next week's Substack
*jumped for 10+ minutes on the trampoline (with gratitude that I felt like doing it, since I didn't at all feel like it yesterday)
*continued work on this poetry MS I'm reading for an acquaintance, making extensive notes on individual poems and thinking how to advise her, in the capacity of a second-round reader (she has already received the MFA for which she submitted a draft of this MS as her thesis), toward eventual publication
*made the bed
Yes, more or less in that order. I generally leave the bed until mid-afternoon, to give the sheets ample time to air (I fling all the covers back first thing so that the fitted sheet is exposed to air and light for some hours) before I make it up neatly, so that it's nice to get into at night. One of my particular sensory bugbears is sheets: too rough, too rumpled, not firmly tucked in at the bottom so they feel like they're sliding off. I don't have to make the bed, necessarily (I don't on Sundays), but if I don't, I still fold the top covers back neatly, so that they can be pulled up straight and secure when I get into bed at night.
And now the groceries are here, so I'd better see to them.