Sunday, March 6, 2011

InStyle, I am so over you

While waiting in CVS to get a prescription on Friday, I picked up the March 2011 issue of InStyle magazine. This will strike many folks who know me as a total laugh-riot, as I am one of the more fashion-impaired people they likely know. But on a whim, I bought it, thinking I would give it a look-over and see what was being declared “hot” for spring. Of course, now that I think about it, that is also pretty damn funny, as the chances of me wearing anything faintly “hot” are slim to none.
What I learned after perusing the magazine is that I have apparently aged out of InStyle magazine. Not so much because they don’t address women over 40 – they have Julianne Moore on the cover for heaven’s sake, and she is 5 years older than I am. But because I have less than zero interest in their focus on celebrities and their fashion choices. Once upon a time, I enjoyed paging through InStyle just to see what was what in fashion, but this time, I found I rather wanted my $4.99 back.
It isn’t so much whether they give an adequate nod to women over 40 – obviously, their target demographic is not 45 year old women with four children and a reluctance to shop. Honestly, they do only give a “nod” to women over 40, despite their choice of cover model. But hey, that is an assumed fact with a magazine like this, so I will let that one go.
It has more to do with the fact that not only do I not even faintly resemble the women they photograph wearing clothing I have rarely actually seen outside of their pages – but that these people live in a completely different universe, one that apparently doesn’t include dog hair and the potential for mud to stain the cuff of their skinny jeans. Honestly, even if I did own the $282 cotton lace sweater featured on p. 244 with the $350 pair of trousers, the chances of it remaining intact for any extended period of time are very slim (in the interests of full disclosure, I never will own a $282 sweater, unless I bought it on sale for $39).
Also, I wonder if the women who could swing spending $632 on just a single top and trousers are actually reading InStyle themselves. Somehow, I rather have my doubts, although I suppose it is possible they read it if for no other reason than to see if they themselves are featured.
Don’t misunderstand – I’m not being a fashion curmudgeon. It is more of a case of what age has brought me – in this case, my 45 years have taught me that in my particular corner of the world, the ins and outs of fashion and $282 sweaters are not worthy of my time or attention. And even daydreaming about it isn’t fun anymore. Once upon a time, I really enjoyed paging through Vogue, InStyle and other fashion mags, but to say I am over that is to put it all too mildly. My daydreams now are more likely to be about how I wish we had four horses and a flock of chickens, or about how I wish I were a skilled meal planner and chef.
Suffice to say, this will be my last issue of InStyle. I have no doubt they will fare well despite the lack of my $4.99 per month. And I wish no evil upon those who anxiously await each month’s new issue.
I rather do wish I could have my $4.99 back, but I will take the lesson learned as adequate payment for now.

1 comment: