The Grace Experiment, Part 7

My weekly attempt to amaze and, incidentally, annoy you with 5 little things for which I'm feeling grateful.

1.  My little brother* actually buying his plane ticket to come see his object du lurking  me.  Turns out the whole arranging transport thing is a critical component to visiting someone halfway across the US.  I trust those of you with younger siblings can relate.

*Show of hands - who lives in southern California & wants to date a super-adorable, twenty-something military officer?  Also, am I writing this just because I know it would embarrass the life out of him?  

2.  Sprinkles Cupcakes

3.  This March J. Crew catalog, which I want to frame and cherish forever.  Reads more like a gorgeous photo album than a catalog, although I am of course covetous of most contents.

4.  A good dose of perspective.  Turns out my not being able to afford the J. Crew canon - or any of it, if we're being all factual and stuff - isn't the biggest problem going.  I know!

5.  Reveling in this early spring weather:

21 Questions

THE Question. You know the one. Since the very moment I walked back down the marital aisle as Mrs. Anonymous Husband, it seems as though all that new acquaintance types (and co-workers, and family members . . .) want to quiz me about is when the Anonymous Husband and I plan to Go Forth and Have Babies. I realize this is hardly a new question for those of us past the college years, but it astounds me how often I hear this familiar, cliched, if usually (sometimes?) well-intentioned, refrain.

Having seen and heard from a number of you & my non-bloggy friends, it would appear that many of us are fielding the same infernal question, whether you are (1) like me and mentally preparing/wishing for future children and the related concept of 18-24 years of not sleeping in ever, or (2) not wanting any children of your own, at any point or (3) very much wishing to have children but struggling to conceive them in the first place. In short, many of us lady-types happen to not pregnant right this very second. We are also perhaps not eager to discuss that fact with, by means of completely random example, our boss' ridiculous secretary.

So I propose a strategy . . . I'm foolish, but not so much so that I think a boycott of the age-old question is going to get us anywhere. Thousands of years of bad behavior + reality TV culture = we're just not going to avoid it. And as much as I'd like us to have some sort of handy team uniform to succinctly convey our message - say nice jeans, plus a J. Crew cashmere crew-neck sweater emblazoned with helpful arrows pointing to our ladybits that proclaims:

"YES, THAT IS MY UTERUS! IT IS UNOCCUPIED AT THE MOMENT AND FOR THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE, BUT THANK YOU FOR YOUR INTEREST!"

Can't you just picture it - maybe in a shell-pink, loopy cursive?. . . I realize that this might encourage, as opposed to discourage, the questions. Hmmm.

Maybe instead of a Team Uniform, anticipating the future questions might help. Because if we can't beat the pushy questioners, at least we can have a few years to concoct a politely snarky retort. I took a look at THE Question - and there always is one, isn't there? - as it has evolved over my past 10 years to see if we could detect a pattern. Looking back, here's what the 10 year retrospective looks like:

Age 21: "Vodka or tequila shot?"
(Hint: Choose vodka. You can thank me later.)
(Double Hint: The questions grow more onerous from here. See Hint #1.)

Age 22: "Law school (fill in grad school of choice here)? Have a job lined up yet?"
Age 23: "Law school? Have a job lined up yet?"
Age 24: "Law school? Have a job lined up yet?"

Age 25 (as receiving diploma): "When are you getting married?"
Age 26: "When are you getting married?"
Age 27 : "When are you getting married?"
Age 28: "When are you getting married?"

Age 29: "When are you two newlyweds having kids?"
Age 30: "When are you two newlyweds having kids?"
Age 31: "When are you two newlyweds having kids?"

What do we think comes next here? "When are you having your next child?" "Have you submitted your union fees & soul to the local Mommy Mafia?"

Or should we just stick to the matching J. Crew sweaters?

From Tory to Target, A Budget Look

Just back from a successful Junior League meeting in which the controversial topic of Miss Posh didn't come up event once, unfortunately. Absent such thought-provoking subject matter, I dedicated myself to trying to make friends here in town, or as my BF-EM so elegantly puts it, "hitting on the Ladies of the League."

In any event, I figure it's been at least 5 minutes since we've done a Target shopping round-up, and with the holidays coming up and the economy tanking and tigers and bears oh my, blah blah, we all could use some budget-friendly holiday attire ideas. After all, I'm all about being Prettier Than Everyone Else, not Less Financially Responsible Than Everyone Else.

So imagine my delight upon entering Target on one of my daily occasional visits and seeing a few pieces clearly, ahem, inspired by some festive holiday Tory Burch and J. Crew pieces I've been intrigued by but not been able to / willing to justify. The Target Limited Edition collection in particular is such a welcome relief after that Sigerson Morrison / Elf Attire debacle we talked about here.

Here is the fancy-pants TB / J. Crew version of the object o' my holiday party frock eye (which looks somewhat garbage-bag esque in photos, but is gorge in person) & shoes:

(Credit: Tory Burch)

Tough to see in this photo, so just take my word for it that this is lovelier in person. Perhaps not $995 lovelier (gaah!), but nice nonetheless.

(Credit: Tory Burch)

Love the jewel details. Hate hate hatey hate the $850 price.

(Credit: J. Crew)

Remeber these J. Crew Gabrielle beauties? Love these both in the heel and flat editions.

And now for the Target version . . . bear in mind the legendary horribilityness of the Target website and web photography. Again, these are so cute in person:

(Credit: Target)

In person, this is a yummy brocade shift with a great, 60s-ish neckline. And:

(Credit: Target)

OK, so it isn't identical to the Tory, but it also isn't (gulp) $850. And finally:


(Credit: Target)

(Credit: Target)

A nice twist on both the J. Crew and the usual Revas.

Target, I'm so glad we're friends again. Now if only I didn't have those pesky Christmas presents to buy for, you know, other people . . .

Exit Polls and Fergie Trolls

It's that special time, kittens, where we tally up the votes for last night's pity party poll and survey your right to vote (magnanimously assigning us in the US of A's right to vote to all), and find that this little J. Crew cashmere goodie is soundly defeating my husband, my family, and my go-to celeb (second only to Anti-Prep Paris) on the reliability factor. My money was on the AH, but cashmere, as always was running a reliable close second . . .

. . . but what I'm really curious about is the 4% who voted for La Lohan's purported return to normalcy. Is it her fortunate, recent return to red hair? Or the unlikelihood that a snooty prissy pants like yours truly could ever hope to a beneficial husband or family turnaround? Please discuss.

In other breaking news, we here at the Pretty have taken a look at our Google Analytics and have discovered a not insignificant legion of Fergie (the Pea, not the weight-loss Royalty) fans frequenting these fair pages in search of her visage, presumably based on this post. From all corners of the globe, at all sorts of intriguing hours, mind you. Visitors, you are most welcome here, naturally, but I fear Miss F. Pea may not be featured here as often as your Googling purchases may prefer. Regrets, darlings, but a blogette has only so many hours in the day to condescendingly judge review celebrity fashion. Or Burberry be-splattered shorts and bowler hat and frapping abysmal fashion taste and however could you think me possible of tolerating her for more than one post sans personal delivery of Josh Duhamel to my very own doorstep, as it were. Thank you for your understanding.

Smootches,

Legallyblondemel

Target v. J. Crew Smackdown: More Shoes

Alas, we suspected that our recent good fortune with the designer Target collections (and stint in speaking in the first person) was drawing to a close. Call it a hunch, but after relishing in discount cuteness with the recent Anya Hindmarch and Mossimo collections, we just knew a stinker was en route. Sure enough, our worst fears were confirmed today when we personally inspected the new Sigerson Morrison shoe line. Actually, that's not true; our worst fears run more along the lines of Mister Clooney depriving the world of his iconic beauty (if not his endless political opinions), but that's a subject for a different post - er, love you, Anonymous Husband! Moving right along - the design, the quality = all bad. Let's take a look at the hard evidence, shall we?

(credit: Target via Flickr)

"Introducing the Psychedelic Elf Collection at Target . . ."

(credit: Target and Flickr. And Beelzebub.)

"Elves Gone Bad: See 'The Keebler Story: When Bedazzlers Strike' at 10/9 pm Central on Lifetime"

(credit: Target and Flickr)

Jem & the Holograms called from 1986, and they'd like their pumps back. (Seriously, this was the worst of the bunch as far as looking cheap went. Boo all around.)

The bummer of it is, we WANTED to like this collection due to these appealing little flats:

(credit: Target and Flickr)

Me likey the fun colors & jewels - not to be confused with Be-Dazzling - but the quality of the line is so poor overall, we're not touching these. Instead, we're going lay in wait for a good promotional code from our more expensive friends at J. Crew. We present for your delectation:


(credit: J. Crew and Flickr)

The Babette heel. If loving this shoe is wrong, then we don't want to be right.

(credit: J. Crew and Flickr)

The Gabrielle heel.

(credit: J. Crew and Flickr)


The Gayle patent leather heel. And:

(credit: J. Crew and Flickr)

The Felice (like Mrs. Martin a la vintage "90210"! Except much more fun! Exclamation point!) jeweled ballet flat.

Conclusion: J. Crew wins in the first round, knocking out ol' Sigerson Yucky-son. Target, this won't keep us from darkening your doorstep every 5 minutes or so, but we will cut a wide swath around the shoe section for the time being . . .