I have a pretty neutral wardrobe, which I love and appreciate. But sometimes it gets a little boring. And as I was scrolling through The RealReal for inspiration, I remembered a lovely Chanel flower brooch I used to have. (Like this one– picked up for a song back in my days working at Galeries Lafayette.) I’m not spending $300+ for a fabric flower brooch! But, Etsy to the rescue!
It really jazzes up what is quite a plain (but incredibly cozy) jacket. And it was only $34. Quite the bargain for something I can wear with lots of things.
I think the key is to not go to cutesy with a flower brooch. So I’ll be wearing it with loafers, cropped flare pants (no, not these! yikes) and a turtleneck. It’s all about the contrast, right?
Hat tip to Leandra Cohen for the inspiration. Maybe I need red next? There are lots of fun ones available- for a lot less than Chanel’s camilla. (Darn it, 1994 Amy- there are so many things I wish you had not discarded so lightly!)
I think doing a little check-up on your style and closet is always a good idea. Life changes, you change, styles change. So when I picked up on these two tools, I wanted to share them with you all.
Are you impressed by that one red sweater? Me too. (But I haven’t worn it yet :))
First tool: using data to determine what clothing you need for your actual life.
I love her approach- I love data! And what I realized from actually quantifying my clothing needs. Guess what? I have a tendency to buy for a life that I don’t actually live. I love “smart casual” but I live a more sporty casual life. So fewer wool pants and blazers- more leggings!
This doesn’t mean that I have no use for my sweater collection. I just have to make a point of wearing them with my more athletic gear. So you’ll see me with tights and cashmere sweaters more and more. Lining up my style and closet with my life.
Second tool: try out the 75 Hard Style Challenge
This feels like a natural add-on to tool #1. This challenge encourages you to shop your own closet and follow these rules:
Get dressed (intentionally) everyday for 75 days
Document your daily outfits
Do not buy anything new
Set your challenge goals/intentions
Get creative and rely on your own brain for inspiration
Organize + clean out your closet
-Source: Mandy Lee
I think the key word is “intentionally”- which to me means caring about what you are wearing! Making an effort. For 75 days! But at the end of that 2+ months, I think I’m going to be wearing a few things that have been lingering in my closet (like that red sweater above!) and feeling more inspired. We shall see!
Have I gotten your attention with my provocative title??? But hear me out. I’ve been poking around at job postings on LinkedIn, and I know a number of people looking for jobs right now. And what does everyone complain about? “How on earth am I ever going to get a job when hundreds of people apply in the first 2 days of a posting?” And I have an answer- you should have to pay to apply for a job.
Apparently charging people to apply for job postings is not actually legal (in California, at least.) But this is another case when the government has gotten it all wrong. But let’s use economics, not our feelings, to approach the problem.
It’s too easy (free) to apply for jobs today
Sure, you may have to set up a profile on Workday or some other applicant tracking system, but it’s super easy and essentially “free” in terms of cost, time and hassle to apply for a job. Don’t get me started on Easy Apply- I can only imagine the piles of resumes that recruiters get with that harebrained scheme. The result of making it free to apply to a job? Way too many people apply. Candidates who are not qualified. People who don’t really want the job but just want to see what happens. People who are applying for every job that crosses their LinkedIn feed. It is very hard for a qualified, interested job seeker to stand out in this crowded field.
What happens when the price for something desirable is set at zero?
Well, anyone who has taken Econ 101 can answer that question- demand is going to go through the roof, while supply stays constant. There are lots of examples of these types of “broken” markets:
Any number of other resources that have been labelled a “right” but where supply is fixed (healthcare comes to mind)
And how do you solve any of these situations? You should introduce a cost that reflects the true demand for a product and brings demand in line with supply.
And the same is true of the job market. We need to introduce more friction, more costs into the job market. If only to stop the madness.
Current job search strategies are a zero sum game
Start looking for a job and you’ll quickly be told a couple of things:
You’ve got to optimize your resume and your LinkedIn profile to have any chance of being found in the 100s of resumes submitted for job postings. Better yet, customize it all for each particular job posting. (Companies have sprung up to provide this very service- check out ResumeWorded, Job Scan, Teal)
You’re gonna need to network, network, network. The only way to find a job is to leverage a human contact to somehow get your resume on the top of the endless pile
Both of these strategies are ways to theoretically circumvent the completely broken job market. Rather than try to fix the market, we are told there are ways for a smart, connected person to find a loophole and get the job. But there are a couple of issues with these approaches.
If everyone optimizes for key words, guess what- the recruiter will still end up with the same big pile of resumes. We’re back to a standoff between me and the 200 other candidates.
And networking- well, I have issues with the whole concept. First of all, some introverts (me!) are just not good at it. Sure, I’ve got hundreds of LinkedIn connections but I wouldn’t call my network at all robust. And frankly, it’s discriminatory that people have to rely on knowing someone at Meta in order to get a job at Meta. What if you didn’t go to college, didn’t go to a certain college, don’t know anyone from high school who works at Meta? I guess you are just out of luck, sucker.
So we need a different approach to matching candidates with jobs.
You should have to pay to apply for a job
Introducing a price is the only way to solve this enormous problem. The price doesn’t have to be huge- but I am pretty convinced that even $5 cost would cut down on the unqualified and the disengaged from applying at all. In some situations, maybe the cost is $5; in others, it might be $150. If you are super qualified, and you are super passionate about, you might pay $1000. It all depends on the job and the demand for it.
I know what you are thinking: “But this isn’t fair! How can disadvantaged people afford to pay?” Well guess what, although the obvious cost to apply for a job now is “free”, it’s not really free. Because right now, you are taking time and energy to apply for a job that you have almost a 0% chance of getting. There’s a pretty significant “cost” to that- you just aren’t seeing it. By bringing it out into the open, I think recruiters and candidates will all have a better experience.
I’m still thinking through the details but I think I’m on to something here. What do you think?
I am a big fan of newsletters. I really appreciate the ability to support creators and innovators who speak to me. But there are times when you need to take a step back and re-evaluate all your newsletter subscriptions. Because it can get out of hand!
One of my favorites- The Free Press- with its weekly TGIF email of modern absurdities
Not only can newsletter subscriptions get expensive FAST (some are $150+ a year) but they also clog up our in-boxes and minds. So if you find yourself in one of the following situations- it’s time to re-evaluate:
Letting the newsletter linger in your in-box for weeks and eventually, guiltily, deleting it
Thinking “I am so not interested in this topic” repeatedly
Seeing similar points of view and content across newsletters
Tapped out on a topic (see comments about The Drive below!)
So I’m letting a few go. Peter Attia’s The Drive- I feel like I have enough info for my level of commitment on the topic of my health. I know I need to eat protein, do strength training, etc. At this point, the content is getting way beyond what I am willing to act on.
I’m saying goodbye to a couple of news/hot topics newsletter subscriptions. There’s too much overlap with other sources.
What am I keeping? Well, The Free Press for one. It is well worth $80 a year. And I support its mission, big time. The Glenn Loury newsletter is also a real winner, where you’ll hear some radically different takes on the news. And I am loving a couple of new additions- Becky Malinsky and Leandra Cohen‘s individual newsletters on fashion and style. They both feel authentic and quirky. Love that.
I guess my point is that you’ll change, the newsletter writer may change, and you need to make sure your subscriptions are serving your current and future you.
There’s a theory out there that if you want to be happier, one way is to rediscover your childhood passions. And I think there’s something to that. I spent quite a bit of time during the pandemic doing exactly that. Fountain pens. Journaling. Office supplies. Penpals. Cooking. Even starting this blog- I’ve always loved writing.
But one major childhood passion has remained unexplored…until potentially now. Video games! I loved all the old classics from the 80s. Mystery House. Zork. Myst. And then I went to college and pretty much never played again.
And then I saw this…
I guess I need to buy an Xbox?? Where do I start?? But feeling excited about video games for the first time in a long time…
Sometimes, during the monotony of a Peloton ride (sorry, Matt Wilpers, but it’s true), I think about my parents- both of which are dead. And my level of the ancestry.com family tree is up next. One day, 6 months after my death, there will be one of those little green leaves, linking to my death certificate.
And after many hours in Zone 2 and 3, contemplating death, I’ve landed on two insights.
The ability to move is so precious. Don’t give up your strength or mobility without a fight! A lot of people would love to be able to pedal along as I am doing in that moment
Life is too short to do things that you hate. If you are trying to build a habit, it’s so important to find a way to love it. If Peloton isn’t your thing, find something that is. Because, guess what, we’ll all be dead at some point and there’s no point being miserable
OK, that’s my PSA on contemplating death for the day. Carry on.
I’ve never been a fan of revealing clothing. It looks tacky to me- and now that I’m a bit older, it’s even less appealing. But I still like the look of wearing sheer on top. But in a non-scary way!
COS merino wool tops are one way to do it
I’ve got two options for wearing sheer. The first- COS merino wool tops. Also available in turtleneck. It’s just a bit sheer, and less so in the darker colors. And it’s a great base layer under cardigans, so you get a bit of sheer without worrying about how pretty your bra is. $69- not a scary price at all.
If you want to go a bit more luxe and old school, there’s the Hanro woolen silk underwear- long sleeve, short sleeve, leggings. A bit more traditional long underwear vibe. But expensive- $140+. Still, I grabbed one on sale and it’s truly lovely. A tad less sheer than the COS option, but it feels terrific on your skin.
One thing to note about these tops is that they go fast, at the beginning of the Fall season. Uniqlo has a very reasonably priced option– but there are no sizes left. Wearing sheer seems to be a perennial favorite- and those in the know snap up the standards way before it gets cold.
I recently ordered (and returned) a sweater from Matches. I’d had my eye on this sweater since ~August when it was first posted online. I love a stripe, after all! But upon receiving it and trying it on, two lessons learned occurred to me:
Goodbye, lovely too long sweater!
Be suspicious when something has had multiple markdowns AND there’s lots of stock by size available. I couldn’t believe my luck that this sweater had survived in my size for 5+ months. And look, it was marked down from $275 to $66! A miracle. That should have been my first clue.
If something requires faffing, don’t bother- return it asap. What’s faffing? It’s the need to mess around, position something perfectly in order for it to feel right. With clothing, it generally means that it’s too big, too small or just not for me. With this sweater, it’s too long! (and I am a stickler for things being long enough.) Which required a lot of faffing in the mirror to make me happy.
So nope, this sweater is going back. I knew I’d never reach for it- so even $66 is too much! Bon voyage, sweater, on your trip back across the Pond! And hopefully this lessons learned will stick…
Since my last post, I’ve gone deep on the topic of beautiful socks. Yes, there is such a thing! And I’ve found a new place to add to my next-visit-to-Paris list: Mes Chaussettes Rouges (perfect name, BTW). Want to join me? We’re flying Air France La Premiere, of course!
And once we’re there, apparently we need, truly need, some Gammerelli socks, made in Rome since 1798. The fashion world has moved on from red (just as I started wearing them- of course.) We’ll be picking up a few pairs in violet.
I’m solidly in Camp Neutral when it comes to clothes. But when even the WSJ is writing about colorful socks, I know it’s time to give the trend a try. And they make wearing those stiff (but cute!) loafers so much more comfortable!
I bought these lovely red ones from Falke, but I’m thinking I should have checked out the many options of colorful socks from Uniqlo. Perhaps next time…
