Julia Fox

This Is Dressed

Posted by

0

…and well-dressed? Whatever Julia Fox wishes to sell, it’s hard to tell, but fashion—that could be stretching it

Julia Fox has more outfits for running errands around Los Angeles than film parts to boast. And is better known for her skimpy clothes than meaty roles. Latex is one of her fave fabrics for clothing. But, as with everything else in fashion, latex has not escaped the inflation that has hit us hard, and it’s getting so expensive that using a sheet big enough to make an actual outfit is untenable. So, she is content with scraps, assembled as a barely-there one-piece (even if it looks like two in the front). We do not know if she uses natural or synthetic rubber, but either way it must be dear enough for her to buy as little of it as possible to assemble the outfit. Ms Fox, a fashion designer apparently, is known for her “custom” clothes. This is likely another one of them, put together to delight social media and for its habitués to talk about.

Ms Fox has worn underwear as outerwear before—and the indescribables between—but they were not pieced precariously like it is in the latest latex composite. It is not easy to describe an outfit with no name, but credit must be given to the fragments that can be held together, with the help of two amoeba-shaped rings, to yield a wearable form that on the left side reveals an entire rump. In the rear, the upper parts are secured by strings, or laces. A ruched triangular piece from the waist down blocks the gluteal cleft, but not the thigh gap. Part of the right buttock is revealed too. A band at the bottom, not part of a skirt, hugs her thigh and, in the back underscores the left butt cheek. In sum, the outfit is a walking wardrobe malfunction waiting to strike.

On Julia Fox, such clothes are no longer refreshing or provocative, not when these DIY-seeming bits have become her go-to clothes for anything between a visit to the supermarket and a stroll down a red carpet. These are not special-occasion get-ups; they are, to her, everyday wear. Ms Fox, who told Interview magazine that she’s “always been someone’s muse”, is so accustomed to the scantiness that they have defined her, to the point that anything she wears that requires more than a metre of cloth is downright weird and not quite normal, and not muse-like. She also suggested that her style changed drastically after her brief romance with Kanye West. But, her look is worse and more tragic than Kim Kardashian before she dated the guy. The real novelty now would be when she really puts on something that can be called a dress, in every sense of the word. That would be an eye-opener.

Photo: Getty Images

Sock ’Em In The Eye?

Posted by

0

Do women really want to look this battered?

Photos: (left) Chanel and (right) Shutterstock

By Mao Shan Wang

Beautiful eyes. Who doesn’t want them, especially those of us not especially blessed, and need some tools of colour for enhancement? But I really can’t make out the make-up du jour. From Chanel’s single blacken eye to Julia Fox’s total black out, what is really going on? Why, at a time when we really want to look healthy and unscarred by a unrelenting virus, does any woman desire to give the impression that she was abused? Willingly! Or, is this some self-pummeling as a beauty expression I—and, presumably, you—know not of? If I were to leave my home looking like that, people I know (and do not) would be very worried. Either my eye make-up skill has gone to the dogs, or domestic violence—no laughing matter—has roosted in my home.

The Chanel models I can understand. They did not have a choice in the colour of their eye makeup, nor the intensity of the make-believe bruise. But for Julia Fox, a woman then dating the most powerful man in music and fashion, the indefatigable Kanye West (they reportedly broke up in the middle of this month), and attending the Kenzo and Schiaparelli shows with her beau, the black eyes offered not quite positive optics for the actress and the man next two her, known to be somewhat misogynistic (how do you call his attack of Taylor Swift and Billie Eilish?). Could this be Mr West’s doing—a compulsory makeover of the women he dates? Or was Ms Fox trying to look as sexy as Diggs of Cats and Dogs?

I am tempted to see this trend as makeup brands attempting to sell more eye colour. Chanel’s runway looks certainly impacted their makeup division bigly before—remember the nail colour Vamp? Or was 1994 too long ago? Dark nail polish (and it would get darker), while totally new then, was not suggestive of violence (Vamp would go on to be so successful that it was ranked fifth all-time best-selling nail colour of the previous century) willfully inflicted on women. But a black eye socket? So that fashionable women could appear as though there were physically assaulted? Or, in the case of Chanel, like they fell off a horse? I give up.