April 29, 2011

  • Well, I did it.

    Watched The Wedding live.  Woke up about 3:30 a.m. and tried to go back to sleep but couldn't, calculating the time in London and what was happening.  About 4 a.m. I gave up and got up.

    Those headpieces referred to as "fascinators" are well named, as it's fascinating to wonder both how they manage to stay put, and what on earth their wearers were thinking.  Does England not have mirrors?  Did Victoria Beckham actually look in the mirror and think, "Oh yes, that's attractive"?  And as for Prince Andrew's daughter, Beatrice....words fail me.  "Bizarre" is wholly inadequate to describe what she looked like with that...that thing on her head.  It was a true display of paternal affection that her father was willing to be seen with her.

    The Queen looked regal and lovely as always, though in my opinion - which is worth every dime you paid for it - the hat was a mistake.

    William looked incredibly dashing though also rather depressingly hair-challenged.  He's not even 29 yet, for crying out loud!  The boy is going to be bald as the proverbial billiard ball before he's 40, mark my words.  Of course, his brother's hair shows that a lack of same isn't necessarily a bad thing.  Bless his heart, Harry's hair looks to be a whole life form by itself.

    Catherine was gorgeous, and her dress was stunning.  It is my fervent hope that brides all over will take careful note of how important are sleeves and necklines as design elements, and quit with the strapless wedding gowns already.  Her sister's dress was just about as stunning, too, and Pippa coming down the aisle with a three year old on each hand was a charming vignette indeed.

    Not quite as charming was one of the three year old girls who subsequently glowered at the cheering crowds from the balcony at Buckingham Palace.  Her parents must be beet red with humiliation!  Can you imagine?  All over the world are broadcast photos of the bridal couple, and down there on the left is their daughter, frowning like a miniature spectre at the feast, so to speak.  Gee, isn't she a cute little girl?  


    This evening I went to a Meetup for Fort Worth Singles Over 50 at a bowling establishment.  Oddly enough, when I went in I saw a group of likely looking people and asked if they were the group for whom I was looking, and it turned out no, they weren't but they easily could have been, as they were the Fort Worth Widowed People group (or something like that).  Turns out they bowl there regularly.  Found my group and we had a very nice time, indeed, though it was a nuisance trying to find a suitable ball, as those with holes large enough for my fingers are too heavy, while the lighter weight balls apparently are intended for those with small hands.  Still managed to win the second game, though none of my foursome managed to break 100.  As one of our number wryly observed, our team motto should be "Oh, well!"  laughing

Comments (4)

  • I've said it before and I'll say it again:  you should be a columnist, dear Anne!  I didn't see the wedding, but I'm sure glad I read your column about it!

  • Re: Harry's hair - yes, he does have his uncle Althorp's hair, but he's also got the Mountbatten bald spot coming on. As they stood in the vestibule of the Cathedral, with the sun shining in, his thinning hair was clearly visible. Genetics tell. :)

    The Queen's clothing designers specialize in those dress/coat combos, don't they? She always looks so elegant and put together. My mother had several outfits like that when I was growing up.

    I think Fascinators and just plain silly - be bold, wear a proper hat - make your statement and be done with it!


  • You what gets me about the strapless gowns? Yes, they're less modest, but the less modesty bothers me less sometimes than the idea that for going on a decade now, 95% of all dresses have to have THE SAME NECKLINE.

    What? Why???? Why is there NO individuality in this anymore? Why is it that whatever style of wedding gown somebody designs, whether full or sleek, mermaid or traditional, IT CAN'T HAVE SLEEVES? Is designing necklines just too boring, or something? Or is it like Big Idea, who went with the idea of Veggies because the technology for animating arm movement was out of their price range? So what, on a $2000 wedding gown, shoulders and sleeves are just TOO HARD?

    What is WRONG with the fashion industry that they impose such a moratorium on distinctive style from the waist up?

  • And the worst thing in, only perfectly proportioned ladies look anything like good in them. It's unflattering on less-endowed skinny girls, makes generously-endowed slender ladies look like some kind of threat, and does nothing at all for the brides who wish there was a bit less of themselves to go around. Strapless is not so aesthetically bad if it shows off that which is effectively shown off, but it's horrible for anyone less than perfect -- there's no detail to distract, nothing to draw the eye away from insalubrious proportions, etc. And then there's just the whole effect of having absolutely NO clothing above a a certain point -- it just makes me think that something was forgotten or didn't have time to get finished, or something. It's a jarring contrast especially when the gown is very full and fancy -- layers of silk and satin and lace, and then.......skin. In my mind, it creates a similar impression to someone stepping out of the shower wrapped in a towel. :tongue:

Comments are closed.

Post a Comment