So many words I’ve posted lately, at least so it seems to me. Let’s have a Nearly Wordless Wednesday — haven’t done one of those for ages. And to match, how about an equally quiet Outfit of a Recent Teaching Day. Wool pants (I love the fit on these J Crew Cafe capris); a grey cardi, silk owl-print (yes it is, such clever whimsy!) shirt, also J Crew.
I tried a few different pairs of shoes and none seemed quite right with the length of the pants (Note to Self: really need a simple black pump, preferably pointed-toe, preferably less than 3-inch heel). Then I spied these Jeffrey Campbells sitting patiently on a shelf, unworn for at least 18 months. Not really sure why, except that I don’t do heels as much anymore, and when I do I have a few favourites that call me most insistently.
Given that all other pieces of this outfit were purchased within the last year, I was happy to incorporate the shoes, bought over 5 years ago (posted on them here). It always seems too easy, to me, to put together a decent outfit from new purchases. More interesting, and more clearly a sign of a consistent and persistent individual style is still liking and wearing items from one’s own wardrobe, strands from further back in one’s own tapestry of life. This can be overdone, of course, but somehow the balance between adopting the new (as in Sue’s articulate and insightful post on Trends) and having some foundation of one’s own preference of some longstanding really appeals to me.
Interestingly, of all the pieces in this OOTD, only the owl shirt and the shoes might be considered trendy. . . yet the oldest items, the shoes, have not dated out of wear yet, in my opinion, because their shape is classic, their colours muted. And the owl-print blouse, bought just this fall, I’m certain will be showing up in What I Wore posts years from now; its almost-neutral blue and simple skim-fitting shape, especially in silk, cancel any concerns of the print (again, muted by its geometric regularity) screaming its fun too loudly.
Damn! I just can’t do it, can I? I set out to do Nearly Wordless, and ten minutes later, what do we have? Words, Baby, Words. . . .
Now I’m just waiting for yours — do you like to balance Old Favourites with New Purchases? Do Trends have a place in your wardrobe? Have you recently breathed new life into a forgotten favourite piece? I’d love to know. . . .
The shoes add such interest here, I think a great choice.
I find it difficult to limit words when I compose a new post…I have tried to be spartan but it usually backfires and I end up with a tome!
Apparently, I don't do laconic well either! 😉
I do mix old with new. My wardrobe is fairly minimal, but I'm working on jazzing it up. One of these days I'll gather up the courage to post what I wore.
I love those shoes – they really add interest to the outfit.
It does take some courage to post these, Lorrie, but with kind encouragement of supportive readers (like yourself!), it can also be fun. When you're ready . . .
I very rarely buy things new but when I do, I mix these pieces with whatever suits my mood, old or new. If I see a new trend I'll find I sometimes have something in my closet from the first time the trend rolled around.
Love those shoes!! They add a great punch to this look. And probably any look you decide to wear them with.
True enough — the new trends can often be recognized in their predecessors. Not sure why these shoes got forgotten for so long — they are pretty good with this outfit, aren't they? And I think you're right that they're quite versatile
I really like those shoes because they are versatile and comfortable. I have been living out of my small suitcase and I intend to recycle my "orphans" when I get home so that it is easier to find those Old Favourites.
They are comfy, yes, a definite bonus!
You've been relying on that suitcase for many, many weeks now — you'll be quite happy to have more variety, I suspect.
I LOVE this outfit. Those shoes could not be more perfect with the pants. T straps are my fave style of shoes.
I love a T-strap as well. I do keep asking myself why these shoes have been neglected — they're pretty decent. . .
I love it too, elegant! Friend visited me recently, and said "You •can't• have all your clothes here?" However, I do- and told her (we are friends of three decades) she might have too much. Have core value of wearing the things I have; was not always so.
I'm clearing out somewhat right now and having to replace because my size has shifted a bit with recent weight loss — but Paul and I share a very modest closet . . . very helpful, truly, in forcing choice and awareness. . .I wonder if your friend will be inspired with the way you can work a smaller wardrobe (particularly such a well edited one)
I love your use of language & today/s alliteration.Could you explain your choice of
blogtitle ? Latin right?….my recall only very sketchy…but mater nominative…familiae genetive..of the family?Why familias?
Funny how language can give pleasure but also, with age, really irritate!
Materfamilias? Simply the female counterpart of a Latin word that does get imported into English occasionally: paterfamilias, the head of a family or household. At the time I began writing the blog, I was not long past having defended my doctoral dissertation–much as I valued so much of that academic journey, I wanted to integrate another part of me that often got pushed out of the picture through those years — my role as mother of four young adults. So Materfamilias just popped into my head. And since I was Writing to figure out how those various parts of my life fit together: MaterfamiliasWrites. I have since wished I'd thought longer and more carefully to get a less awkward name, but I rather like its history. . . .My Latin is also from very long ago, but your reading of those cases seems about right to me — It's a good base to have, no matter how deeply time has buried it, no?
Hmmm! Latin is still a pleasure to use in English language…n,b…nota bene / i.e. id est/ q.e.d. quod est demonstrandum ….all grammatically correct.I don/t believe there is a word in English materfamilias…it is surely grammatically wrong.Perhaps used in Canada.? To be correct it should be mater familiae ?Sorry to possibly be rather pedantic,but old habits die hard!
Dear anonymous Familias is archaic genetive plural of familia. Hope you find this helpful. The older we get the more we need to resist becoming pedantic and closed to new experiences. As always I enjoyed your post mater and look forward on your quiet hair post. It's a book I very much enjoyed. Mary
Thanks for the knowledgeable clarification, Mary… Wow! My readers are impressive.
Anonymous: you're right in suggesting Materfamilias is not a regularly used English word, but we do trot Paterfamilias out occasionally. It's in the Oxford British….I took a liberty, but I wouldn't quite call Materfamilias a neologism. Lovely to have readers who care about words….
This is such a lovely outfit and you're right about 'having some foundation of one's own preference.' As I always say, there's no such thing as a short blog post!
Thanks! As for short posts, they may be possible, but not, apparently, for me.
Such a pretty blend of blues! The shoes are just perfect for this and I agree they have a timeless quality. I haven't tried the Cafe Capris yet but they look so wonderful on you I may have to do so soon. BTW, I'm catching up with your posts again as they don't always seem to be showing up in my reader. :-/
I have two pairs of the Cafe Capris now (the second is a festive pair in a geometrically patterned heavy silk brocade– love them!) and am really happy with them. What reader are you having the problems with? I wonder if others are as well . . . I do so wish I were more techie!