18 June 2007

I'm probably gonna lose readers over this, but...

...I simply adore this grey belted bustier deep-pleat side-pocketed romper my girl-crush of the moment Kim Kardashian wore to a birthday party in the Hollywood Hills last week.

In fact, I adore it so much I spent the greater part of last night's penultimate episode of "Charm School" typing into Google various permutations of "bustier," "romper," "pleated" and "the sexecutive look."

Because of her petite (5'2") and curvy frame, Kim's options for evening-wear are much more limited than one might think, and as such, I give her major props for coming up with a never-before-rocked outfit that both flatters her assets - those thin, toned gams and sculpted shoulders - and keeps her mind-boggling chest-to-waist-to-ass proportions in relative check.

A girl can only wrap herself up in a universally-flattering DvF so many times before she starts to yawn and resort to craptastic threads like this, after all.

As a result of my arduous five-magazine poolside session yesterday, I'm now aware that the style Gods that are the executive editors of Harper's Bazaar, Elle and W have decreed it is no longer advisable to match one's belt to one's shoes (the new thing, apparently, is to only match one's clothes to one's purse), but here, when the goal is clearly to achieve the look of an after-hours office temptress, the strictly gray/black color palette is the spot-on right choice. The contrast of the work-appropriate pearl studs, corporate hair and black peep-toes with the copious amount of leg and boobage certainly makes your head spin...but in a really really good way.

Kind of like that ass of hers.


dc girl said...

Lose readers? Are you kidding? She looks hot! I never would have guessed, if I just read a description of the outfit, how much I would like it, but here and on her, it looks great.

Anonymous said...

I really like it too, even though I could *never* pull it off.

Anonymous said...

I won't abandon you over it, but that look is positively horrible. It's a bastardization of two very different looks: the bustier and shorts. Hi, on top I'm all sex kitten, but on the bottom...all leisure? Wait. What? In a very short time you will look back on this and say to yourself "what was I thinking? It was one step too far." It's like Ethel Merman singing disco--you know the trend has gone one step beyond. Stop now.


Johanna said...


It still wouldn't work even in a more evening-ish color and fabric like black matte satin?

Do you have an aversion to the romper in general? That may be a sticking point, too -- I love 'em, but most of my friends think they look like something they used to dress up their talking Cabbage Patch dolls with.

Thanks for not jumping ship - we love what we love, right?

finally hungry and off to Cosi,

bff in chicago said...

I actually kind of like it. I think I'd like it better with a pair of cap sleeves and as you suggested, in black, but eh, I'm not so down on it as rdhd is.

now *that* you wouldn't wear to work, right? Johanna???

Anonymous said...

If there was a little less cleavage up top (clearly, I'm female), I'd like it better.

brown rowergirl said...

Dunno about this one, Jo. She's gorgeous, for sure, but this is a leeetle bit over the edge for me. Don't take offense, but I could so see you in this.

Looking fab, of course!

west coast devotee said...

I love that you love her (believe me), but that getup is shitastic. You're serious about this? You like it?

For shame, Jo.

Anonymous said...

I think it would be fine if the shorts were a skirt. Then it has s clear identity.

No, I'm not a fan of the "romper" if that's what this get-up is called (that thing little kids wear that's a one-piece, right?), but I'm even less of a fan of those long "city" shorts or whatever they're being called these days. If this outfit were two-piece it would still be bad. Shorts cannot be dressed up. Period.